Skip to main content

Full text of "Roman Catholic claims"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at http : //books . google . com/| 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


The Ministry of the Christian Church. %vo, \^s. 

Contents : The Foundation of the Church— Apostolic Succes- 
cession — ^The Witness of Church History — The Institution 
of the Apostolate — The Ministry in the Apostolic Age — 
The Ministry in the Sub- Apostolic Age - Conclusion and 
Application— Appended Notes. 

The Clergy and the Creeds. A Sermon Preached before 
the University of Oxford on Trinity Sunday, 1887, with an 
Appendix on a recent Work, entitled ' The Kernel and the 
Husk,' and an Article by the Hon. and Rev. W. H. 
Fremantle, Canon of Canterbury, called ' Theology under 
its Changed Conditions.' Second Edition, is. 


Digitized by VjOOQ IC . 







Digitized by VjOOQ IC 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Two writings of a very different order and value 
have appeared since the first edition of this book 
was published — The Infallibility of the Churchy by 
the Rev. Dr. Salmon, Provost of Trinity College, 
Dublin (London : John Murray), and a criticism 
of my book, entitled Diist^ by the Rev. Luke 
Rivington (London : Kegan Paul, Trench, and Co.). 
The latter I have noticed elsewhere,^ and it is only 
necessary to repeat here three observations. 

1. The conclusions which I have drawn from St. 
Hippolytus* language about Callistus (pp. 93 f) 
and the importance assigned to the discovery that 
he was the author of the Refutatio (Pref p. xv) 
depend not upon the abandoned theory of Bishop 
Wordsworth and others, but upon Dr. DoUinger's 
interpretation of the incident, which is at present 
substantially accepted by almost all scholars. 

2. Mr. Rivington extravagantly underrates the 
influence of the Forged Decretals in the consolida- 

^ Some remarks on * Dust ' (Oxford : Black well, 50 and 51 
Broad Street ; London : Simpkin, Marshall and Co.). 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


tion of the papal power, and consequently the 
effect of the discovery that they were forged, upon 
the historical basis of the Papacy. To use the 
language which Mr. Rivington approves {Dust 
p. 13): "the fraud [in the decretals] consisted in 
assigning the language of a later period to the 
writers of an earlier one," viz. to the popes from 
A.D. 90-314. Thus their recognition as genuine 
gave to the growing claims of the Papacy an alto- 
gether fallacious appearance of antiquity. They 
converted what was a pretension, a claim, an 
aspiration, into an accepted principle firmly rooted 
in the precedents of the whole Christian past, 
reaching back to the Apostles. No sober historian 
could deny that a wholly new epoch of Canon 
Law begins with their acceptance. It is in fact 
almost impossible to exaggerate the extent to 
which they extended and strengthened the system 
of appeals to Rome, and developed the existing 
tendency to centralize the governmental authority 
of the Church in the hands of the Pope. To sub- 
stantiate this I would refer to the quotations mostly 
from Roman Catholic writers in Mr. E. G. Wood's 
Regal Power of the Churchy e.g. to one from the 
Jesuit P^re Regnon {Etudes religieuses et litter- 
airesy Nov. 1866) : "the reforms brought about by 
the pseudo-Isidore consist essentially in reserving 
to the Roman pontiff the trial and judgment of all 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


3. Mr. Rivington refers me to an article by 
Father Morris in the current number of the 
Dublin Review (Oct. 1888). Father Morris has 
ascertained that the petition against Annates (see 
p. 157) is not, in the original MS. in the British 
Museum, described as from Convocation or any 
other body, and is therefore of more uncertain 
origin than the ordinary authorities — Strype, 
Wilkins, Froude, Dixon, etc. — have assumed it to 
be in ascribing it without hesitation to Convoca- 
tion.^ The question of its origin must be there- 
fore reserved for the decision of specialists. No 
reason has been shown why I should alter any- 
thing in my book, except the phrase in which I 
followed these ordinary authorities on this subject 
(P- 157)- AH the rest of the technical defence 
appears to stand. It remains the fact that the 
Marian Convocation — though it apparently re- 
ceived absolution from the Papal Legate for its 
rebellion from the see of St. Peter — took no formal 
action to repudiate the Royal supremacy. It is 
plain from the petition of the Lower House on 
Mary's accession that they thought some further 
step in this direction desirable and necessary. It 
therefore remains the case that Elizabeth's action 
in claiming of the bishops acceptance of the 

1 Froude Hist, of England (4th ed.) i. 361 : Dixon Hist, of 
Ch, of England \. 113. In State Papers Henry VIII. v. p. 344 
no. 722 (5) it is called a 'petition of Parliament.' 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


supremacy, was formally justified by their un- 
rescinded acceptance of it in the days of Henry 
VIII. But I should wish to emphasize the reasons 
which led me to lay no stress on this technical 
defence (p. 156). We Anglicans are not at all 
disposed to deny that we find ourselves at the 
period of the Tudors in an Erastian atmo- 
sphere. But this Erastianism no more unchurched 
the Church of England at the period of the 
Reformation than it unchurched the Byzantine 
or Prankish portions of the Catholic Church long 
ago. Let me refer on the subject to an admirable 
pamphlet by the Dean of St. Paul's, On the rela- 
tions between Church and State} 

In reading Dr. Salmon's important and inter- 
esting book, in which thorough knowledge is put 
at the disposal of a singularly facile pen, and 
lightened by the play of a quick sense of humour, 
one cannot but wonder how any reasonable man 
can, in the face of history, accept the more modern 
Roman dogmas of Papal Infallibility and the 
Immaculate Conception. It is naturally grati- 
fying to me personally to find how constantly 
statements in this book are confirmed by the 
language of his larger treatise on the points with 
which they deal in common. Nor perhaps in 
reference to the Infallibility of the Church as 

^ London : Walter Smith. Reprinted from The Christian 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


distinct from the Pope, is there really very much 
difference between Dr. Salmon and myself. He 
accepts the dictum, *The Church to teach, the 
Scripture to prove* (p. 124). He would further, 
I suppose, regard as making the most cogent and 
authoritative appeal to us that teaching of the 
Church, which has been most constant and invari- 
able and least merely local : he recognises that (in 
spite of all that leads us at first sight to view the 
Ecumenical Councils with distrust) they were 
actually right in their decisions (p. 288-9) : they 
did actually, under very difficult circumstances, 
preserve the balance of the faith. I believe there- 
fore that I am rightly interpreting Dr. Salmon in 
saying that he would have every Christian first of 
all instruct himself in what has been the teaching 
of the Church, paying most deference to what is 
most catholic, and then, thus instructed, * search 
the Scriptures whether these things be so.* ^ 

On the other hand those among us who set 
most store by the name of Catholic would not 
regard the Fathers as authoritative in matters of 
science and criticism, but in matters of faith 
and morals ; Le, in that which constitutes the per- 
manent Christian * tradition,' not in that which 
belongs to the natural development of human 
knowledge (Salmon,/.^, pp. 161-168); nor should 

^ Cf. Mason Faith of the Gospel^ Second Edition, 1889, pp. 
259-263, an excellent passage. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


we regard the current teaching of the Church at 
any particular moment as infallible on every point 
of faith ; nor should we regard the General Council 
as infallible /^^ se (pp. 290-298); nor further should 
we regard the Creed of an accepted Ecumenical 
Council as of infallible authority in such sense 
as to dispense with verification in Scripture, or 
render such verification rationalistic ; on all these 
points I may refer to what I have tried to say in 
Chapters III. and iv. 

But if there is really this substantial harmony 
between us, then I think I may venture to criticise 
some of Dr. Salmon's minor statements. I think 
he must admit (p. 14) that we read the Fathers 
on matters of faith with something more than * a 
purely historical object': we must pay the greatest 
deference to the teaching which, for instance, 
Origen and Irenaeus give in common, as repre- 
senting the truly catholic tradition of the Church. 
Again, from this point of view I think he must 
admit that the celebrated maxim *quod ubique, 
quod semper, quod ab omnibus,' interpreted as its 
author clearly explains it {Commonit. 2, 3, 17 ; 
cf. in this book p. 43), is not fairly open to 
his criticisms.^ Further he must admit that the 

^ P. 265. Vincent never meant by * ab omnibus ' what is held 
by all men without exception, or by all who call themselves 
Christians, but by the Church as a body, as opposed to individual 
teachers. We should note how, at the beginning of the de 
Principits, Origen distinguishes the common tradition from his 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Fathers, as for instance St. Athanasius, hold 
equally to the Scriptures as the court of 
appeal and to the Church as the authoritative 
teacher.^ Once more, it seems to me that the 
effect which the confusions and quarrellings 
incidental to the episcopal Synods of the fourth 
and fifth centuries ought to produce on our mind, 
is described incomparably better by Mr. Holland 
in an admirable sermon on * The building of the 
Spirit,'^ than by Dr. Salmon. Surely what we 
are struck with is the fact that in spite of the 
unsatisfactory method in which the controversy 
was often conducted and the decision arrived at, 
the result manifests so conspicuously not the 
chance action of variable majorities, but the 
steady working out into logical formulas of the 
balanced antithesis of the original faith.^ The 
unsatisfactory appearance of the councils, con- 
sidered in the light of their result, only makes us 
more confident that the Holy Spirit is at work in 
the Church guaranteeing the results of controversy 
which find final and universal acceptance, and 
keeping the Church at the last resort on the right 
lines. Finally, I do not think Dr. Salmon has 

own speculations and inquiries. The common tradition is what 
Vincent means by the faith held *ab omnibus.' 

^ Thus I am sure my representation of Athanasius' position 
(p. 63) is completer than Dr. Salmon's (p. 193). 

2 See his recent volume On behalf of belief , 

3 See below, pp. 2-4 and 41. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


considered sufficiently that it may have been 
in God's providence that the creed in respect of 
Chrisfs Person was defined and secured before 
a divided Christendom rendered for a time im- 
possible a really ecumenical council. 

Advent, 1888. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


It is always important to explain what exactly 
is assumed at starting in every book, or in other 
words, for what class of readers it is written. This 
book then is written for persons who accept, or 
are disposed to accept, the Catholic position ; that 
is, who believe that Christ instituted a visible 
Church, and intended the apostolic succession of 
the Ministry to form at least one necessary link of 
connection in it : who accept the Catholic Creeds 
and the declared mind of the Church as governing 
their belief: and who believe in the Sacraments, 
as celebrated by a ministry of apostolic authority 
in its different grades, as the covenanted channels 
or instruments of grace. Further, this book is 
addressed to catholic-minded persons who are 
members of the Church of England, or Churches 
in communion with her. Such persons find them- 
selves attacked from the side of Rome, and hear it 
denied that it is possible to be Catholics without 
being Roman Catholics. It is against such claims 
made upon us from the side of the Roman 
Church that the following pages are intended to 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


be a defence, mostly in the way of explaining 
positively the Anglican position, and showing it 
to be both catholic and rational. Thus Chapter I. 
is a general explanation of the Anglican position 
as the * via medial and a general statement of our 
attitude towards the Roman Church. After that 
follows an answer in detail to each article of the 
Roman assault. Thus Chapter II. vindicates the 
Anglican or Catholic conception of Church unity 
as against the Roman modification of it Chap- 
ter III. endeavours to explain the true or primitive 
conception of Church authority, and Chapter IV. 
the true relation of the Church to the Bible. 
Chapter v. examines the Roman interpretation 
of our Lord's promise to St. Peter. Chapters VI. 
and VII. bring to the test of history the modern 
claims of the Roman see. Chapter VIII. ex- 
pounds the meaning of schism, and clears the 
English Church from the charge of it Chapter ix. 
is occupied in vindicating the validity and juris- 
diction of the Anglican episcopate ; and Chap- 
ter X. in defending the Anglican Church on the 
charge of heresy. 

This book is largely a reproduction of some 
papers on the same subjects originally published 
in the Indian Churchman in the early part of 
1884, and afterwards reprinted in India. From 
time to time I have had occasion to notice as I 
went along the recently published letter of Mr. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Luke Rivington on Authority : A plain reason for 
joining the Church of Rome. This letter professes 
to be * a reply' to my reprinted articles (see p. i), 
and I felt therefore that it gave me some cause 
for complaint, because in fact, even on the point 
with which alone it deals — the claims of the 
Roman see — it made no allusion to the main con- 
tention of my argument, but directed its criticism 
mostly to its minor or insignificant issues. What- 
ever value the book may have had, it was not a 
reply to mine. I have endeavoured in the course 
of the following pages to give a more full-faced 
reply to the Roman arguments than Mr, Rivington 
has given to mine. There are three other remarks 
that I wish to make on Mr. Rivington's book. 

I. Mr. Rivington betrays an almost incredible 
forgetfulness of the conditions of the controversy. 
He says that since Sir Thomas More and St. 
Francis de Sales spoke or wrote about the 
authority of the Roman see there have been " no 
new literary discoveries, of any importance, about 
the early centuries of the Christian life." This is 
a sentence to make a man rub his eyes ! It is not 
true in the positive sense that St. Francis * shows 
an intimate acquaintance with all the Fathers 
whom* I quote. At least he did not know the 
Refutatio of St. Hippolytus. But this is not what 
is most important. The fact is that St. Francis 
and Sir Thomas More knew a great deal too 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


much. Sir Thomas More had before him the 
whole almost unassailed fabric of the Isidorian 
Decretals — an immense body of documents sup- 
posed to emanate from the Roman bishops, be- 
ginning with St Clement and reaching down to 
Melchiades (A.D. 90-314), and all assuming a 
developed form of the Papal power existing and 
recognized from the earliest times. Their autho- 
rity had been much shaken before St. Francis de 
Sales' death, but it was six years after that event 
(/>. in A.D. 1625) that the whole of this immense 
fabric was finally demolished by David Blondel in 
St Francis's own see of Geneva. The spurious- 
ness of these decretals was indeed shown so 
demonstratively that the Roman writers them- 
selves have had unanimously to abandon them, 
with the result that the fabric of the Papal autho- 
rity has been almost totally deprived of its 
historical and literary basis in the early centuries.^ 
And as if this were not enough, it must be 
remembered that the interpolations in St Cyprian, 
tending to the authority of the see of Peter, had 
been inserted in the edition of Manuzio in 1563, 
and would no doubt have been read by St Francis 
as the genuine words of St Cyprian. Further, it 
was not till the eighteenth century that the Bene- 
dictine editors of the Fathers purged the Patristic 

^ See some excellent pages in Mr. E. G. Wood's Regal Paver 
of the Churchy pp. 25-29. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


writings from a vast deal of spurious matter, all 
more or less in the interests of mediaevalism. After 
pointing this out — and I am not the first to do * it 
— I think I am justified in asking whether an 
assertion like this at the very outset of an argu- 
ment, does not go far to discredit it ? 

2. A great many of Mr. Rivington's arguments 
and quotations might have been in place if any one 
had denied for instance that St. Peter was the 
leader of the apostolic band : or that the Roman 
Church was commonly regarded, at least from the 
third century in the West, and the fourth century 
in the East, as having the prestige of the * see of 
St. Peter'; or that there was after the fifth century 
a * papal ' tone about the Roman claims, however 
much it fell short of the clear note of the 
mediaeval Papacy. But nobody questions these 
historical facts. Only we protest that the last- 
mentioned fact, the papal claim, was not of 
catholic acceptance, that is, was unheard for 
several centuries, was never accepted in the East, 
and was a very gradual growth in the West. 
Very little of Mr. Rivington's book is even 
directed to showing that it was of catholic accept- 

3. Mr. Rivington has found "a plain reason" 
for joining the Church of Rome. I should have 
thought his title a rather suggestive one. Great 
questions are not decided on single issues. There 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


is * a plain reason ' for most courses of action — for 
instance, it is * a plain reason ' for suicide that it 
rids us of " the ills we have " : but it came into 
Hamlet's mind that there was another reason, if 
not so plain, at any rate more weighty, against 
such a course of action, viz., that " we fly to others 
that we know not of" I do not at all believe that 
Mr. Rivington has made good even his one plain 
reason, but I am sure that he has not even con- 
sidered a great number of weightier reasons 
against the course he suggests. 

My thanks are due to the Rev. F. E. Bright- 
man and Mr. R. B. Rackham for help in prepar- 
ing this book for the press. 

C. G. 

PusEY House, St. Denys, 1888. 

Addenduvi to p. 18. n.^ My attention has been called to a 
passage in Newman's Discourses to Mixed Congregations^ p. 251, 
where he enumerates as the parts of what would constitute a 
* mortal operation' upon the Anglican Church and destroy its 
essence or definition, the following : ** Take its bishops out of 
the legislature, tear its formularies from the Statute Book, open 
its universities to Dissenters, allow its clergy to become laymen 
again, legalize its private prayer-meetings." This was uttered 
in 1849. Since then three of the contingencies contemplated 
have actually occurred. Would any one now imagine that the 
occurrence of the first two would make the operation mortal ? 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



I. The Via Media and the Roman Catholic 

II. The Unity of the Church, 

III. The Authority of the Church, 

IV. The Bible in the Church, 
V. The Promise to St. Peter, 

VI. The Growth of the Roman Church, 

VII. The Development of the Papacy in Latin 

VIII. The Nature of Schism, . 

IX. Anglican Ordinations, . 

X. Anglican Orthodoxy, 






Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 




The English Churchman is constantly liable to be 
told — and to be told from very opposite quarters — that 
if he were only 'logical' he would join the Roman 
Church : that behef in a visible Church and in its 
authority, in the Apostolic Succession, and the jurisdic- 
tion of the Episcopate, leads legitimately and logically 
to the conclusion of submitting to the see of Rome.i 
Thus Anglicanism is represented as an impossible via 
media between pure Protestantism and Rationalism on 
the one hand and Roman Catholicism on the other. 

We are perhaps a little encouraged to meet these 
claims made in the name of logic with a good heart by 
the consideration that logic, in the sense of argument, 
is apt to be most efficacious when it is most one-sided, 
and content to ignore everything in the facts which does 
not suit its case. " Reason " it has been most wisely 
said " is wide, and manifold, and waits its time ; and 
argument is partial, one-sided, and often then most 
effective, when least embarrassed by seeing too much." ^ 

^ This is the argument not only of Roman controversialists but 
also of Dr. Hatch in his reply to Dr. Liddon Contemporary 
Review ]\mt 1885, p. 864. 

' Church Human Life and its Conditions p. 85. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


The most plain case is by no means always the most 
true. Thus Hooker remarks about the early heresies 
on the Incarnation that " because this divine mystery is 
more true than plain, divers having framed the same to 
their own conceits and fancies are found in their exposi- 
tions thereof more plain than true." So in effect in the 
early centuries it was the heretics who were notorious 
for one-sided appeals to * logic/ while the Church was 
for this very reason called the * via media ' because she 
held on her way between opposite extremes, persisting 
in holding together a complex scriptural idea or truth 
which one-sided heresies would have torn asunder.^ 

^ This has been drawn out by Professor Mozley in a passage 
which has become famous : see The Theory of Development pp. 
41-43 : ** In this way the logical controversy proceeded on the 
great doctrines of Christianity in the first centuries : different sects 
developed these in their own way ; and each sect appealed trium- 
phantly to the logical irresistibleness of its development. The 
Arian, the Nestorian, the ApoUinarian, the Eutychian, the Mono- 
thelite developments, each began with a great truth, and each 
professed to demand one, and only one, treatment for it. All suc- 
cessively had one watchword, and that was, * Be logical.* Be 
logical, said the Arian : Jesus Christ is the Son of God ; a son 
cannot be coeval with his father. Be logical, said the Nestorian : 
Jesus Christ was man and was God ; he was therefore two persons. 
Be logical, said the Apollinarian : Jesus Christ was not two 
persons ; he was not, therefore, perfect God and perfect man too. 
Be logical, said the Eutychian : Jesus Christ was only one person ; 
he could therefore only have one nature. Be logical, said the 
Monothelite : Jesus Christ was only one person ; He could there- 
fore only have one will. Be logical, said the Macedonian : the 
Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father, and therefore cannot be a 
person distinct from the Father. Be logical, said the Sabellian : 
God is one, and therefore cannot be three. Be logical, said the 
Manichean : evil is not derived from God, and therefore must be 
an original substance independent of Him. Be logical, said the 
Gnostic : an infinite Deity cannot really assume a finite body. Be 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


We have in fact no cause to be ashamed of this phrase 
the via media which common consent has fixed upon 
Anglicanism. It was a phrase in which the Church of 
old gloried as a proper description of her position. And 
in what sense ? It did not mean the way of modera- 

logical, said the Novatian : there is only one baptism for the 
remission of sins; there is therefore no remission for sin after 
baptism. Be logical, to come to later times, said the Calvinist : 
God predestinates, and therefore man has not free will. Be logical, 
said the Anabaptist : the Gospel bids us to communicate our goods, 
and therefore does not sanction property in them. Be logical, 
said the Quaker : the Gospel enjoins meekness, and therefore 
forbids war. Be logical, says every sect and school : you admit 
our premisses ; you do not admit our conclusions. You are incon- 
sistent. You go a certain way and then arbitrarily stop. " .... 
** The whole dogmatic creed of the Church has been formed in 
direct contradiction to such apparent lines of consecutiveness. 
The Nestorian saw as clearly as his logic could tell him, that two 
persons must follow from two natures. The Monophysite saw as 
clearly as his logic could tell him, that one nature must follow 
from one person. The Arian, the Monothelite, the Manichean, 
saw as clearly as their logic could tell them on their respective 
questions, and argued inevitably and convincingly to themselves. 
To the intellectual imagination of the great heresiarchs of the early 
ages, the doctrine of our Lord's nature took boldly some one line, 
and developed continuously and straightforwardly some one idea ; 
it demanded unity and consistency. The Creed of the Church, 
steering between extremes and uniting opposites, was a timid arti- 
ficial creation, a work of diplomacy. In a sense they were right. 
The explanatory Creed of the Church was a diplomatic work ; it 
was diplomatic, because it was faithful. With a shrewdness and 
nicety like that of some ablest and most sustained course of state- 
craft and cabinet policy, it went on adhering to the complex original 
idea, and balancing one tendency in it by another. One heresi- 
arch after another would have infused boldness into it ; they 
appealed to one element and another in it, which they wanted 
to be developed indefinitely. The Creed kept its middle course, 
rigidly combining opposites ; and a mixed and balanced erection 
of dogmatic language arose." 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


tion, the * middle way ' of steering clear of all thorough 
and intelligible and free statement of principle. It 
meant rather the way of combination, the way of com- 
prehension and synthesis. The Church held together 
what a hasty logic would have torn asunder. In * the 
Word made flesh ' we have a complex or double fact 
— a union of Godhead and manhood — and the Church 
had to be true to both parts of her creed, to the Divinity 
and the humanity, letting neither be ignored in the 
interest of the other. The same duty presented itself 
in regard to the doctrine of God : here again she had 
to maintain both God's unity as against Tritheists, and 
the Trinity as against Unitarians. Thus the Qui- 
cunque vult is a document full of balanced and anti- 
thetic clauses, just the sort of clauses which are irritating 
to a hasty logic. "Like as we are compelled by the 
Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself 
to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catho- 
lic religion to say [what seems the 'logical' conse- 
quence] there be three Gods, or three Lords." But 
this principle of combination holds beyond the area 
of theology proper. When we are considering the 
function of the Church and the relation of the Church 
as a society to the individual, we have to guard the 
same principle. You may press the claims of the 
individual to freedom to the extent of annihilating all 
real unity, or you may press Church authority so as to 
annihilate the free development of the individual. The 
former extreme we call individualism, the latter im- 
perialism or absolutism. Both are * logical/ that is to 
say both are the logical application of a true principle, 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


but they are the one-sided applications of it, and we 
should be inclined to call Protestantism on one side 
individualistic, and Romanism absolutist, on the other : 
while the via media undertakes the more difficult but 
not the less necessary task of preserving the balance by 
keeping hold of both terms. The case is just the same 
with authority and private judgment — it is in fact only 
the same problem in the intellectual sphere. The ideal 
state is a via media in which the due authority of the 
Church nourishes the spiritual judgment of the indi- 
vidual into mature life and freedom till "he that is 
spiritual judgeth all things yet he himself is judged of no 
man." The extremes are represented by a dogmatism 
which crushes instead of quickening the reason of the 
individual, making it purely passive and acquiescent, and 
on the other hand by an unrestrained development of 
the individual judgment which becomes eccentric and 
lawless just because it is unrestrained. If there is much 
of this latter extreme in modern life, there is also in the 
Roman Church a great deal of the former. Once 
again and for the last time, the life of the soul is 
intended to be nourished by a due correspondence be- 
tween external gifts of grace, of which the sacraments 
are the visible channels, and the internal action of faith. 
Now in this case also the sacraments have without a doubt 
been preached and believed in in such a way that they 
have come to be treated as charms, or substitutes for 
personal spiritual effort, and on the other side the suffi- 
ciency of faith has been proclaimed in a way that made 
men ignore the necessity of the sacraments. The 
mean lies in the belief both in the validity of sacra- 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


mental grace and in the necessity for the corresponsive 
action of faith. Thus in all departments of religious 
life we come upon this principle of the Via Media, and 
the English Church may well be proud of the title. It 
is not indeed the case that we could reasonably claim 
to have realized this ideal standard with any degree of 
completeness : but it represents the ideal which the pro- 
vidence of God has made it our special responsibility to 
maintain, because circumstances have linked us at once 
to the ancient organization and authority of the Church 
and to the freer life and scriptural appeal of the Refor- 
mation, and have thus given us the special opportunity 
of showing that Church authority is not incompatible 
with the appeal to Scripture and to reason. We are in- 
vested to an exceptional degree with the responsibility 
of being true to the whole of the deposit of truth : of re- 
sisting the fascination of one-sided developments : and 
thus standing ready with the whole treasury of Christian 
truth unimpaired to meet the demands which a new age 
makes upon it with its new developments of character 
and circumstance. 

So, speaking broadly, the complaint which we should 
make of the Roman Church is — not that she is heretical 
— nor that she does not represent a real development 
of principles which are truly Christian, but that she 
represents a one-sided development, and by this very 
one-sidedness has been prevented, both in our time and 
at the epoch of the Reformation, from representing at 
all adequately the whole of Christianity, and that thus in 
claiming (as in fact she does claim) to be the whole, she 
has taken up a position which is essentially schismatic : 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


for that is essentially schismatic which makes for a part 
the claim of the whole. 

Broadly, it is very easy to justify this view of the 
Roman Church. Each race has had in the Catholic 
Church its own particular function. It was the function, 
for instance, of the Greek race with its peculiar intel- 
lectual subtlety and philosophical power to bring out 
into clear light the * treasures of wisdom ' which lay hid 
in Christ, to grasp and enunciate the principles of the 
Incarnation and the Trinity — in a word, to be the 
theologians of the Church. In theology proper the 
Roman Church has been by comparison weak, but her 
strength lay in the gift of government. It was hers to 
bring out all the wealth of authority which the facts and 
forces of Christianity contained within their scope. 
The faculty of empire passed from pagan to Christian 
Rome transformed in purpose and motive but funda- 
mentally the same. In the exercise of this power lay 
the glory of the Papacy but also its danger. Just as 
the danger of Greek Christianity had been the tendency 
to degenerate into an aimless theological accuracy — a 
barren subtlety of intellectual or verbal distinction, so 
the danger of Roman Christianity lay in imperialism. 
The whole idea of the Church becomes under her 
treatment in a measure secularized. The Church be- 
comes a great world-empire for purposes of spiritual 
government and administration. Hence, for instance, 
the primary conception of her unity becomes that of 
unity of government, the sort of unity which most 
readily submits itself to secular tests and most naturally 
postulates a visible centre and head ; and the dominant 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


idea in all religious questions becomes that of authority. 
Indeed all the needs of the early medieval period 
tended to add strength to this tendency. The untamed, 
undisciplined races which formed the material of our 
modem nations were subjected to the yoke of the Church 
(mostly at the will of kings or chiefs) as to an external 
law, which was to train, mould, restrain them. The one 
need of such an age was authority, rule, discipline, and 
the Church became largely a ^ schoolmaster to bring men 
to Christ' She had in fact to do with children in mind ; 
with children whose one religious faculty, which was in 
full exercise, was faith, in the form of a great readiness 
to accept revelations of the unseen world and to respect 
their ministers — the sort of faith which asks for nothing 
but a sufficiently firm voice of authority. Christianity 
thus became, by a one-sided development, a great 
imperialist and hierarchical system. The peremptory 
needs of government tended to overshadow earlier con- 
ceptions of the Church's function even in relation to the 
truth. Compare the Roman Leo's view of the truth 
with that of the Alexandrian Didymus or Athanasius 
and the contrast is marked. Both Easterns and Westerns 
insist equally on the truth of the Church's dogma, but 
to the Easterns it is the guide to the knowledge of God, 
to the Westerns it is the instrument to subdue and dis- 
cipline the souls of men. Thus the authoritativeness 
of tone which becomes characteristic of the Western 
Church makes her impatient of the slow and complex 
methods of arriving at the truth on disputed points, 
which belonged to the earlier idea of the * rule of 
faith.' The comparison of traditions, the elaborate 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


appeal to Scripture, these methods are too slow and too 
indecisive: something more rapid and imperious is 
wanted. It is no longer enough to conceive of the 
Church as the catholic witness to a faith once for all 
delivered. She must be the living voice of God, the 
oracle of the Divine Will. And just as the strength 
and security of witness lies in the comparison and 
consent of independent testimonies, so the strength of 
authoritative oracular utterance lies in unimpeded, un- 
qualified centrality, and Christendom needs a central 
chair of truth, where Divine Authority speaks and rules. 

Such has been broadly the Roman development of 
the Christian religion. It has been a real and powerful 
development of principles really Christian, but a one- 
sided, and for this reason an incomplete development, 
and one which, as soon as it claims to be the whole, 
becomes schismatic. 

That Roman Catholicism is an incomplete develop- 
ment is plain to us at the present time, as we look at 
the matter from outside, on several grounds. 

(i) It is unscriptural. Scripture says a good deal 
about authority, and therefore there are certain passages 
of Scripture with which Rome is thoroughly at home — 
which she has thoroughly made her own. But with the 
whole of Scripture she is not at home. This is shown 
by the immense gulf between practical current Romanism 
and the general tone of the New Testament — a gulf 
which is partly the cause and partly the effect of the 
prevalent ignorance and disuse of Scripture, as a whole, 
which is notorious and admitted amongst Roman 
Catholics. Thus M. Henri Lasserre who has made a 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


name by his devotion to our Lady of Lourdes, recently 
published, with the imprimatur of the Archbishop of 
Paris and under the special benediction of the Roman 
Pontiff, a translation into French of the four Gospels. 
He did this, he tells us in his preface, on account of 
"a fact notorious and universal" — a fact which is re- 
garded as " the primary cause of the diminution of the 
Christian spirit " — namely, that the Gospel "is very rarely 
read even by those who profess to be fervent Catholics. 
Never at all by the multitude of the faithful." " In fact," 
continues M. Lasserre, " ask your neighbours and your 
friends, all who make up your circle ; ask yourself, my 
dear reader : — and you will not hesitate to affirm, not 
perhaps without a profound astonishment, that for a 
hundred persons who practise the sacraments, there is 
often not a single one who has ever opened the Gospels, 
except at hazard, and to go through or to meditate here 
and there upon a few isolated verses." Anything Hke 
continuous knowledge of the Gospels, he goes on to ex- 
plain at length, simply does not exist.^ Such a state of 
things Cardinal Manning appears not only to recognise 
as a fact, but to justify. " Catholics readily admit," he says, 
that " they do not go to the text of Scripture for their 
devotion, as others do who are out of the unity of the 
Church.'* " The Church puts into the hands of its people 
books of devotion which represent the whole order and 

^ I quote from the twenty-third edition. Shortly after this book 
was suppressed, on the ground of inaccuracies of translation. If 
this was the only ground, we must, of course, expect that another 
translation, freed from such inaccuracies, will at once appear with 
the same imprimaturs and benedictions. There was an obviously 
boundless demand for a version of the Gospels in French. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


completeness of revelation, and not the partial and 
unordered aspect of Scripture/'^ Now we English 
Churchmen feel that there is a very natural reason why 
Roman CathoHcs should not know more than select 
passages of Scripture. Their favourite devotions to the 
blessed Virgin and the Saints, \}[i€\i popular doctrines of 
indulgences, and of purgatory, find no countenance at 
all in the New Testament. A man cannot be at home 
in the current Roman doctrine of * good works ' and in 
St. Paul's Epistles. And this unscripturalness of the 
Roman Church has a further result: we do not, we 
cannot, look to her for much help in interpreting the 
New Testament as a whole. Immense progress has 
been made in Scriptural interpretation within the last 
thirty or forty years,^ but how singularly little has the 
Roman Church helped in it, or is she likely to help in 
it. We go to older Roman commentaries (such as that 
of Cornelius a Lapide) for accumulated information on 

' Manning's Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost pp. 210, 211. 
P. 208 he speaks of " the level and dim surface of the Sacred 
Text." There may be eyes to which the surface of nature is level 
and dim ; otherwise it would be inconceivable how any one could 
apply such epithets e,g, to the Epistles and Gospels. 

^ I do not, of course, mean that we should not desire in many 
modem commentators, and expounders of Scripture, a much 
greater reverence for the Mind of the Church, but I do say that 
such commentators as Westcott, Lightfoot, Pusey, Trench, or — 
out of Presbyterian communities — Milligan, Godet, Delitzsch, and 
others, — with such preachers and writers as Benson, Holland, 
Liddon, Keble, Church, Mozley, and Newman (almost wholly in 
his Anglican days), represent for our age a really fresh and genuine 
drawing out of the meaning of the inspired Books, regarded as 
inspired— and give us as a result immense spiritual help. By the 
united labours of many devout spirits, Holy Scripture is being 
gradually made to live again. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the various opinions, good, bad, and indifferent, which 
have been held as to the meaning of Scripture, and 
sometimes for valuable suggestion : we go to Father 
Coleridge and others for a great deal of suggestive 
practical commentary on the Gospels — but for the 
legitimate and critical and real interpretation of the New 
Testament, especially of St. Paul or St. John, we look 
with very little hope to the Roman Church. 

(2) It is unhistorical. The Roman Church has dragged 
along with her as a heritage of the past, from which she 
cannot break, a *rule of faith* which makes a new 
dogma once for all equivalent to a false dogma. It has 
therefore been forced upon her to maintain that dogmas 
which have been rendered necessary by the accentuation 
of authority or by the exigencies of popular devotions 
which it was not possible or expedient to restrain, such 
as Papal infallibility and supremacy, the Immaculate Con- 
ception and the doctrine of Indulgences, are portions of 
primitive Christianity, at least in substance. This hopeless 
task she can only accomplish by a treatment of antiquity 
which is absolutely inconsistent with any honest attempt 
to read its record. Thus practically Roman writers deny 
that antiquity has a real record which we can read, and 
ought to read freely. Cardinal Manning makes the appeal 
to Scripture and antiquity "essentially rationalistic. "^ 

* Temporal Mission p. 29, cf. 9 : **It admits Revelation, but it 
constitutes the reason as the judge by critical inquiry of the . . . 
witness of antiquity." We should hold that the Church is the 
primary teacher of the individual, but that her teaching, because it 
is Catholic and nothing more, must admit of being verified by the 
individual for himself, if he has adequate knowledge and patience, 
in the field of antiquity. Morinus' work de Sacrls Ordinationibus 
is a magnificent instance of a current church doctrine in the Roman 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Roman writers generally bid us use the living 
voice of the Church as a witness to what the Church 
of the past did think, and appear to suppose the argu- 
ment of the * difficulty '1 of reading the past records of 
the Church a sufficient reason for ignoring them. Thus 
the whole of modern Roman literature has become 
saturated with a spirit of unfaithfulness to history and 
to fact. There is a great deal of Romanism in the 
Church from the fifth century downward, and this they 
produce with an excessive willingness — they have it at 
their fingers' ends. But we have ceased almost to hope 
to find in a modem Roman writer a candid review of 
the whole facts of a case where the Roman claims or 
dogmas are in question. Candour, an attempt to 
fairly produce the whole case, a love of the whole 
truth^-this seems to have vanished from their literature, 
and its place is taken by an abundant skill in making 
the best of all that looks Romewards in Church 
history, and ignoring the rest. Indeed it seems to be 
not only in dealing with the Papal claims that the 
Roman Church is disqualified from dealing broadly 
and frankly with facts. She has adopted a fatal tone of 

Church having been in former days altered by a free examination of 
the past records. See The Church and the Ministry p. 68, note I. 
^ Rivington*s Authority p. 29. P. 56 he quotes a remark of 
St. Francis " that the early Church," on the Protestant showing 
" must have had a long speaking-tube indeed to make itself audible 
to Luther across three ceniuries, without these centuries hearing 
what it said.'* Luther put his ear very little to the speaking-tube, 
and perhaps there was too much noise during the Reformation to 
make it very easy to listen to the voice, but I should have thought 
that the revival of the knowledge of Greek among other things 
was of the nature of a speaking-tube from the early centuries. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


distrust towards the human reason altogether — so that 
she seems by her whole method to put herself at a 
disadvantage in dealing with some of the most pressing 
problems of our time which are coming up for solution. 
For example. Some fifty years ago a very powerful 
attack was made on the genuineness of New Testament 
documents, and consequently on the historical character 
of the Gospel record. On the whole we can claim that 
this attack has been met and repulsed, and that the 
cause of the New Testament history and records — the 
authorship, for instance, of St. John's Gospel, the his- 
torical trustworthiness of the Acts of the Apostles, and 
the genuineness of St. Paul's and St. John's Epistles — 
stands now on stronger ground than ever before, in 
proportion as the attack was more scientific, more 
radical, and more searching. It has been met by men 
who combined with a strong faith in the Christian Creed 
and Scriptures a courageous belief in evidence, a fear- 
less love of frank inquiry, and it is not therefore 
surprising that tlie victory has been won with little aid 
from the Roman Catholic Church. Now the attack 
has moved backwards, and is directed against the Old 
Testament. On this field the whole problem is still in 
solution, and the victory is still to be won. But it will 
be won, we are sure, by students who, on the one hand, 
hold with a sure confidence to the Inspiration of Scrip- 
ture, and take a careful view of what the Church seems 
actually to have committed herself to on this subject ; 
and, on the other side, face with a determined boldness, 
and patience, and accuracy the critical problem, the 
evidence as it actually is. This field of controversy is 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Still in the main before us, but the experience of the 
past leads us surely to expect the champions of Holy 
Scripture in the fray to come from some other quarter 
than amongst Roman theologians — for this reason that 
instead of the temper required for dealing with it they 
seem to exhibit a mixture of exaggerated dogmatism 
with undue scepticism as to our faculties for the dis- 
covery of truth. And it cannot be pretended that the 
question is one only for the learned. There is no 
question which more cries out for solution amongst 
the working classes than what they are to think about 
the historical truth of the whole Bible. Hitherto, cer- 
tainly, the Roman Church, as it has not done much to 
help us on the ground of the New Testament, so again 
has no ready answer as to the Old. For while Car- 
dinal Manning declares that the authoritative teaching 
of the Holy Catholic Church " excludes the supposition 
that falsehood and error can be found " in any of the 
Canonical books, on the other hand an able Roman 
layman ^ has vindicated his liberty to maintain in the 
public press an acceptance of conclusions which would 
undermine the historical trustworthiness both of the 
Old and New Testament. 

I have been endeavouring to indicate two points in 
which the Roman development of Catholicity, because 
it is one-sided, has had the effect of maiming Chris- 
tianity, and disqualifying it from dealing with some 
of the tasks assigned to it. The over-development 
of authoritativeness has led to the Roman Church be- 

^ I allude to Mr. St. George Mivart*s articles in the Nineteenth 
Century of July and Dec. 1887. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


coming both un scriptural and unhistorical. Thus we 
Anglicans are sure that to accept the Roman Church 
as being the whole Catholic Church would be to betray 
a great trust, and to make ourselves instrumental in 
letting Christianity become narrowed as it comes down 
the ages. "There are more things" in Scripture and 
in Catholicism "than are dreamt of in her philosophy." 
The Church of the first ages was richer in possible 
developments of character and power than the Church 
of Rome. 

I may then attempt to put the case of an Anglican 
Churchman at starting in this way : 

We find ourselves by our baptism members of a 
Church which claims to be part of Christ's Holy Catho- 
lic Church, and which, at the same time, has become 
separated from the rest of Western Christendom by a 
refusal to submit to the claims of the see of Rome. 

We do not find on examination that we fail to comply 
with any of the conditions of catholic communion 
which the ancient and undivided Church recognised. 

We cannot in the face of history treat the present 
claims of the Papal see as tenable or just. In particular, 
the force of these claims is broken, as by an immense 
breakwater, by the whole Eastern Church with her 
millions of Catholic Christians, long before it reaches us. 
For history forces us to recognise in the Roman claims 
the main cause of the schism of East and West: it 
forces us to see in the Papal system a development of 
Christianity which is less than Catholic. 

On the other hand, we see in the ancient and un- 
divided Church a system of coherent beliefs and institu- 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


tions and practices which has been continuous under 
the development of Rome and in the traditions of the 
East, and which is richer and fuller in possibilities of 
life than either the one or the other taken apart. 
To this richer and completer life of the undivided 
Church we make our appeal. From it we would 
start afresh. For while we thankfully recognise that, 
in God's good providence, nothing occurred in the 
English Reformation which broke the continuity of our 
Church in any essential matter with the Church of the 
past, it is not to the Reformation we wish to appeal so 
much as to antiquity. The Reformation was a time of 
reaction rather than of settlement. We see the * fresh 
springs ' of a life constantly new rather in the principles 
of the ancient Church and in the present Power of the 
Holy Ghost. And to reassure us in appealing back to 
the undivided Church and claiming our continuity 
with her, God has blessed with results beyond what 
its first leaders would have dared to ask, the revival of 
religious hfe amongst us, which, during the last fifty 
years, has stirred and taken form on the basis of this 
very appeal. Just in proportion as the Anglican Church 
has been content to act as if she were Catholic, and 
to stir up the gifts within her, in that proportion we 
find she is so and has the living Spirit within her. 

What is reassuring is not merely that the faith of 
individuals, whether priests or people, finds its response : 
it is not merely that we are allowed to realise our 
catholicity in this or that parish, this or that institution : 
it is not merely that all the prophecies of evil which 
those who left us forty years ago ventured to utter, have 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


been signally falsified ^ — it is true further and beyond 
this, that our Church is driven in her formal and 
corporate action more and more to take her stand on 
the only basis which is tenable and enduring, the basis of 
catholic principle. It is surely wonderful that in the Con- 
ference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion in this 
year, a proposal which was made (if report speaks true) 
subversive of the principle of the Apostolic Succession,^ 
should not have been able to get a hearing; or be 
allowed to appear in the official report. It is surely 
remarkable how the bishops take their stand not so 
much on the Articles, as on the Catholic creeds and 
Ecumenical Councils^ — not, that is, on a document 

1 Cf. for instance Dr. Newman's Loss and Gain p. 288. ** They 
[Catholic-minded people] will keep going one by one as they 
ripen." . . . "Their Catholic principles lead them on, and there 
is nothing to drive them back." On the other hand, in the articles 
by the Editor of The Month (July 1885 p. 350), we discern a 
different tone after a lapse of many years, and in the light of the 
experience they have brought. ** Their eyes \i,e. of those who 
represent the Tractarians now] are no longer turned to the city of 
God. . . . They are quite content with their position. . . . They 
are quite satisfied with the ingenious counterfeit of the Catholic 
spirit which they think they have enthroned on the once desecrated 
altars of Anglicanism." 

* A proposal (in effect) to recognise Nonconformist orders as 
'valid* in some sense, though irregular. It was sufficiently 
notorious to be the subject of public sermons. 

• See the Conference of Bishops at Lambeth 1888. Encyclical 
letter attd reports pp. 18, 28, 105 ff., esp. p. no. It was 
especially the real adherence of our (Church to the ancient dogmas 
and apostolic succession, as having still a living meaning, which 
could be doubted fifty years ago. ** You are so few " (who hold 
to such things) "that we can count you." See Lass and Gain 
p. 214. In spite of many fears entertained about the * Pan- 
Anglican Conference,* it has wrought much good in this way — 
that the bishops present were in large majority members of 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


which represents rather the best compromise which 
could be arrived at locally, at a time when questions 
were not ripe for settlement, but upon the mature and 
abiding decisions of the whole Church.^ 

Truly God hath done great things for us already, 
whereof we rejoice.^ 

1 shall hope to show in succeeding chapters that 
Anglicanism is not a mere appeal to precedents — that 
a real and intelligible groundwork of reason and prin- 
ciple underlies our action and our hopes. For the 

unestablished Churches in different lands, and thus the whole 
basis of discussion was taken off the temporary and accidental 
basis of an English Establishment. 

^ The Creeds represent decisions. Their whole purpose is to 
determine. There is no doubt, on the other hand, that, except 
where the Articles simply express over again the mind of the 
ancient Church (as in 1-9, 33-34), or pointedly exclude certain 
mediaeval abuses (as in 30 and 32), or Reformation excesses 
(38, 39), the purpose which governed their wording was to avoid 
an issue rather than to seek it — to shelve questions, leaving a large 
tract of open country, rather than to decide them. This charac- 
teristic of the Articles is at once their weakness as formulas and 
their strength as temporary safeguards. 

2 I am sure that so far as there is wilfulness amongst us or 
within us, we shall all be grateful to Mr. Rivington for making 
public the private warnings of so great a teacher as Dr. Pusey 
(p. II). Such warnings we always need. Shall I return good for 
good, by recalling to Mr. Rivington's notice a public warning of 
Cardinal Newman's of a similar character to his own fellow-clergy ? 
"There are those among us" he wrote {Letter to the Duke of 
Norfolk 1875, P* 4) "^s it must be confessed, who for years past 
have conducted themselves as if no responsibility attached to wild 
words and overbearing deeds ; who have stated truths in the most 
paradoxical form, and stretched principles till they were close upon 
snapping ; and who at length, having done their best to set the 
house on fire, leave to others the task of putting out the flame." 
He goes on to allude to " the chronic extravagances of knots of 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


present I have only two brief remarks to make in order 
to bring this introductory chapter to a conclusion. 

It would be a fatal mistake to suppose that the atti- 
tude we maintain is that of " Romanism without the 
Pope." The Roman temper has coloured all her 
doctrine. It is not only the case that certain doctrines 
and practices are wholly destitute of authority, except 
in the Papal system — such doctrines as those of the 
Treasury of Merits and the Immaculate Conception : 
but the temper of Rome has coloured further her use 
of doctrines and practices that are really catholic — not 
least, perhaps, her use of the sacrament of the Eucharist.^ 

^ It will surprise many of us, I think, to read the following 
statement by Cardinal Newman (1877) of the authoritative Roman 
doctrine of the Real Presence ( Via Media ii. p. 220) : 

** Our Lord is in loco in heaven, not (in the same sense) in the 
sacrament. He is present in the sacrament only in substance, 
substantive^ and substance does not require or imply the occupation 
of place. But if place is excluded from the idea of the sacramental 
Presence, therefore division or distance from heaven is excluded 
also, for distance implies a measurable interval, and such there 
cannot be except between places. Moreover, if the idea of dis- 
tance is excluded, therefore is the idea of motion. Our Lord 
then neither descends from heaven upon our altars, nor moves 
when carried in procession. The visible species change their 
position, but He does not move. He is in the holy Eucharist 
after the manner of a spirit. We do not know how ; we have no 
parallel to the * how * in our experience. We can only say that 
He is present, not according to the natural manner of bodies, but 
sacramentally. His Presence is substantial, spirit-wise, sacra- 
mental : an absolute mystery, not against reason, however, but 
against imagination, and must be received by faith." 

We cannot but feel as we read this, that this supra-local, spiri- 
tual, presence which is not susceptible of change of place — while 
it agrees very well with the ancient use of the Eucharistic mysteries, 
agrees very ill with some modern practices, attractive as they are, 
connected with the Tabernacle and the Monstrance. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


The whole logic of Anglicanism forces us, not indeed 
— God forbid — to ignore the great record of mediaeval 
Christianity, or to cease to venerate the mighty saints 
of those ages, but to make our appeal on all points 
behind Roman and mediaeval churchmanship to the 
* rich depositary ' of Scripture and the ancient Church, 
and make a fresh start from these. 

Secondly, it needs to be emphasized that supposing 
true principles do not force us to accept the present 
Roman claims, they by that very fact do make the 
acceptance of them by individuals a grievous betrayal of 
trust. God has, we must believe, special tasks in store 
for the Anglican Church, tasks for which the Roman 
temper and the Roman theology are by their very 
character and tone disqualified. To some of these we 
have alluded. It seems likely that it will belong to us, 
rather than to Rome, to work out the relations of 
religion to critical knowledge, and to vindicate the true 
character of inspiration in its relation to historical 
research. And if these are intellectual problems, there 
are others in the missionary field and at home of a 
much more practical sort over and above the ordinary 
work of conversion and edification which belongs at 
all times to all Churches. Now these special tasks ot 
the Church belong to special men. God will raise up. 
He is raising up, specially gifted men to fulfil them. 
But we can only do our special tasks through our special 
men, if we ordinary churchmen and churchwomen are 
playing our ordinary parts manfully and well. These 
special vocations, intellectual and spiritual, require a 
strong background of ordinary church life. It is this 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


thought which ought to enable us all to feel almost 
equally responsible for the general work of the Church 
— equally bound to merge our individual interests and 
fears and hopes, even for our own salvation, in the 
larger interests and fears and hopes of the kingdom of 
God. Christ, Who said " what is a man profited if he 
gain the whole world and lose his own soul (life)?'' 
said also, and immediately before it, " whosoever would 
save his soul (life) shall lose it, and whosoever shall lose 
his soul (Hfe) for my sake shall find it." ^ Nothing can 
be so important as to save our soul, our true self, our 
true life, but we are to look to save it not by selfishly 
isolating it and sparing it, but by abandoning it to bur- 
dens which Christ would lay upon us, and giving it up 
to His work and His kingdom. The call of Christ to 
salvation comes not in the way of panic * amazement ' 
and failing courage, but in the way of endurance, and 
patience, and forbearance, of greater hope, and firmer 
ventures of faith and love. 

* St. Matt. xvi. 25-27. See Revised Version. The word for 
* soul * or * life ' is in all cases the same in the Greek and in the 
Vulgate. I have been led to make the remarks in the text above 
by Mr. Rivington*s intimation (p. 59) that he went to Rome to 
save his soul from hell. I cannot think that the Bible leads us to 
suppose that we should save our soul by submitting to the loudest 
voice, which threatens \is with the severest penalties, but rather by 
following the path of imposed duty with the greatest possible 
measure of patience and hope, and the venture of faith which 
holds on to God through all darkness. I should desire a Noncon- 
formist to be brought to the Church by the increasing sense that 
in proportion as he became unselfish, and threw himself upon the 
body he belonged to, he became conscious that as a body, as an 
organization, it did not represent the Divine kingdom, but human 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


God has a great work to do in reviving the cathoUc 
and free life of the Church of England, and He needs, 
in different ways, every member of the Church to play 
a part in it by patience and faith. Who would not 
rather have stayed in the Church of England forty 
years ago with Dr. Pusey, patient and faithful, than 
have left it with others less stable, if more brilliant ? 
The strain, thanks to the faithfulness of him and others 
like him, has become much less in our day, and the 
burden less severe. But yet there is much more to be 
done than God can do in our lifetime, and we mean- 
while must see that no cowardice or faintheartedness 
or impatience of ours hinders its progress. 

* List, Christian warrior, thou whose heart is fain 
To loose thy mother from her present chain, 
Christ will avenge His Bride — yet ere He save 
Thy lot shall be the grave.* 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



It is a question often asked of English churchmen 
*In what sense do you believe in one Holy Catholic 
Church ? You do not claim that the English Church is 
of itself and alone the whole Church ; you admit the 
Roman and Eastern branches to be, equally with your 
own, parts of the Church ; that is to say, you admit per- 
manent and apparently radical divisions in the Church 
in matters of doctrine no less than of government, and 
yet you say the Church is one. Surely you are here 
giving words an unreal meaning. Surely the Romanists 
can call the Church " one " in a much more intelligible 
sense. What they mean by church unity is plain and 
tangible. Their Church is one.' 

Thus Mr. Rivington has recently said ^ : " I saw that 

the plain^ obvious meaning of our Lord's words to St. 

Peter involved the institution of a visible Head to His 

visible Church, besides the fact that His Church is 

described as an organized body, and that the talk of a 

body without a head in the same order of life as the rest 

of the body, is to use words without meaning. An 

invisible body may have only an invisible head ; but a 

^ Authority p, 5. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


visible body, to be a body at all, must have also a 
visible head." 

In this argument, just quoted, and in the sort of 
questioning described above, we have a specimen of the 
way in which we are pressed in the English Church to 
acknowledge that * logically' the belief in the visible 
Church leads to Rome ; and we make our reply to this 
solicitation, first, by endeavouring to explain positively 
the primary sense of church unity, as taught in Scripture 
and held by the Fathers, so as to show that it covers our 
position and enables us to give a rational account of 
it: and then, negatively, by pointing out in what we 
consider the weakness of the Roman conception of 
church unity to consist, considered as a primary con- 

Primarily, then, the Church is the Spirit-bearing body, 
and what makes her one in heaven and paradise and 
earth is not an outward but an inward fact — the indwell- 
ing of the Spirit, which brings with it the indwelling of 
Christ, and makes the Church the great * Christbearer,' 
the body of Christ. The principle of unity in any in- 
stitution or object depends on what it is — on what its 
essence consists in. The unity of a stone and the unity 
of a state are different things. The House of Commons 
is one, and Nature is one ; but in different senses. A 
family again is one, however much brothers may be 
separated by oceans or kept apart from all intercourse 
by bitterest feud, because of a community of descent, a 
common heritage of nature, which runs in the blood and 
physical constitution, and makes it one. Once more, the 
Church is one, in a sense to which other unities may 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


supply analogy and illustration, but which is none the 
less special and unique. She is one because she alone 
of all societies of men possesses a supernatural indwelling 
presence and relation to God in Christ. This is a unity 
which underlies all external separations of place or 
time, all external divisions and hostilities which result 
from the marring of the sacred gift by human sin. 
It is consistent with anything which does not break 
the channel down which the Church's essence is con- 
veyed from the centre and source of life to all who 
share it. 

Of course this fundamental unity of life is not the 
only unity. There is a unity of faith, and a unity of 
love or fellowship also, which we shall have to take into 
account shortly, but a little examination will show us 
that this is the principal sense in which Scripture speaks 
of the Church as one. She is one as the branches are 
one with the vine ^ : that is, one because the sap of 
Christ's Life is derived into her, and to be in connec- 
tion with Christ the source of life is therefore the con- 
dition of being in the unity of the vine. Again, Christ 
prays that His disciples " may be perfected into one " 
by being taken up through Himself into the fellowship 
of the life of God.^ Again when St. Paul speaks of 
the unity of the Church, he makes it depend — not on 
subordination to one external government, but — on the 

^ St. John XV. 1-5. 

2 St. John xvii. 22-23 [R-V.]. It should be remarked that 
Christ did not, strictly, speak of one fold, but of one flock, one 
shepherd : * They shall become one flock.* St. John x. 16 [R. V.]. 
This is worth notice, though it is sometimes quite unduly insisted 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


reception of one food, which is the Life of Christ.^ 
Partaking of one Bread we become one Body, * holding 
the Head' we share His Life.^ The unity of the 
Church is specified to consist in * one Spirit, one body 
(thus understood), one hope, one Lord, one faith,*and 
one baptism, one God and Father of all, over all, 
through all, in all/' It is because the Church pos- 
sesses this unity that she ought to express it in outward 
fellowship and peace amongst her members: because 
we have been " baptized into one body and made to 
drink of one Spirit," it is incumbent upon us to avoid 
" schism in the body " * : it is because we have the " unity 
of the Spirit " that we are to endeavour to maintain the 
*'bond of peace." But the unity does not consist in 
the bond of peace: it does not consist in outward 
fellowship, though it ought to result in it. 

Metaphors must not be pressed without a very strict 
regard to the sense in which they are used, and I have 
been trying to show what is the primary sense in which 
the one Life of the Church is compared in Holy Scrip- 
ture to the one life of the body and of the vine : it is 
because it derives one life from one source into all its 
limbs or branches. It is a natural consequence of this 
way of thinking of Church unity that in Scripture and 
the early writers it is spoken of as progressive. If the 
unity of the Church were primarily a unity of outward 
government it could not grow. It would be an external 
bond once for all imposed. But a unity which is the 
result of an infused life increases and grows as this new 

* I Cor. X. 14-17. 2 Eph. iv. 13-16. ' Eph. iv. 4-6. 

* I Cor. xii. 13-25. 5 Eph. iv. 3. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


life gains force and absorbs the older elements : so 
Christ prays that His disciples may be " perfected into 
one " ; and St. Paul speaks of the whole Church growing 
up " into a perfect man " ue. into a closer and completer 
unity of life. So in the Shepherd of Hermas, sometimes 
reckoned as Scripture in the early Church, the picture 
is presented to us of the Church becoming one by 
gradual purification ; "so also shall be the Church of 
God after it has been purified and the wicked and 
hypocrites and blasphemers and double-minded have 
been cast out; after these have been cast out the 
Church of God shall be one body, one purpose, one 
mind, one faith, one love" {Sim, ix. i8). 

The unworthy lives of Christians prevent the Church 
from manifesting the life of Christ in her, as she is 
meant to do, and being the light of the world, but all 
Christians who believe in a visible Church must admit 
that there have been times when the Church has been 
extraordinarily corrupt without losing that intrinsic holi- 
ness which belongs to her, because she has the Holy 
Spirit within her. Again the Church's indolence in 
Mission work has kept her back from showing to the 
world that she is truly Catholic and truly adapted to all 
races. In the same way the divisions in the Church 
prevent her from bearing the witness she ought to bear 
to the one life by which she lives; but she no more 
ceases to be * one ' by outward divisions, than she ceases 
to be * holy ' by tolerating sin, or ^ catholic ' because 
she has so slothfully put up with two-thirds of the world 
remaining in heathendom. Indeed no one who studies 
church history can be surprised that a Church which 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


has often looked so utterly unholy, which had even in 
the fifth century to be described by Salvian as a " sink 
of vices," should also have grown to look disunited. 
It would be wonderful if sin had not been as busy to 
spoil the beauty of the bride of Christ in one way as 
in the other. The vision of the Church utterly holy, 
actually catholic, utterly one, is the vision of heaven and 
the hope only of earth. 

We maintain then that, primarily^ the unity of the 
Church is in Scripture a unity of inward life, an invisible 
fact: it is in this that her essential unity primarily consists. 
' But then ' it will be said * you are saying that Church 
unity is primarily invisible.' We reply that even at this 
primary stage the unity is external as well as internal. 
It is quite true that every one who possesses a certain 
inward gift so far dwells in the unity of the Church. 
But it is the sacramental principle, that the spiritual is 
imparted (since the Incarnation) through the material. 
This inward life depends on outward means. Without 
Baptism, without the " laying on of hands," which gives 
the gift of the Holy Ghost in His personal indwelling, 
without the Eucharist, without absolution, we cannot 
have or retain the inward gift; and those external 
channels depending, as we all acknowledge they do, on 
the apostolic ministry, connect the inward life of the 
Church at once with her outward organization. Every 
one who has a certain inward gift is in Church unity, 
but no one can claim to possess that gift in its fulness ^ 
but those who dwell within the unity of the apostolic 

* All baptized persons are in a subordinate sense inside the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


organization which is the visible Church. It is only 
through this visible organization that God has cove- 
nanted to give us this invisible Life. 

"We have from Holy Scripture," wrote Dr. Pusey, 
" as means and conditions of the unity of the Church, 
one all-perfect Author, the *One God and Father of 
all ^ ; one end to which all tends, the * one hope of our 
calling ' ; * one Head,' the Head of the Church, our * one 
Lord ' ; * one Spirit,' giving life to every living member ; 
the same sacraments, * one baptism,' and * one bread,' 
by which we are all ingrafted into or maintained in the 
one Body of our one Head ; one apostolic descent of 
the bishops and pastors of the flock, coming down from 
One ; * one ' common * faith,' that which was given 
once for all with the anathema that we hold no doctrine 
at variance with it, although an angel from heaven 
were to preach it. Of these we are receivers only. 

"These, if any wilfully reject, they reject Christ. 
They sever themselves not only from the Body of 
Christ, but directly from the Head, loosing the band 
which binds them unto Him. These while Christian 
bodies retain, they are, so long, like the river which 
'went out of Eden to water the garden; and from 
thence it was parted and became into four heads.' 
They come from the fountain of blessedness; they 
flow down to the ocean of the Eternal Love of God ; 
they water the parched land ; they cool and refresh the 
weary and the thirsty in the places which God has 
appointed for them with the one stream coming down 
from Him. They are one in their one Original, from 
which they continually and unchangeably derive their 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


being. They adore God, the Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost, with the same new song of the Gospel ; they 
confess Him in the same words of apostolic faith ; 
they offer to Him the same incense of praise, and the 
same holy offering whereof Malachi foretold, *from 
the rising of the sun to the going down of the same,' 
pleading on earth to the Eternal Father that one sacri- 
fice, as presented in heaven; they receive the same 
* bread which came down from heaven to give life to 
the world.' Unknown in face, in place separate, differ- 
ent in language, opposed, alas ! in some things to one 
another, still before the throne of God they are one holy 
catholic apostolic Church ; each several portion praying 
for itself and for the rest, united in the prayers and obla- 
tions which it offers for all, by the one bread and the 
one Spirit which dwelleth in all. * In which mystery ' 
(the holy Eucharist), says St. Cyprian, * our people are 
shown to be united, so that, as many grains collected 
and ground and mingled together make one bread, so 
in Christ, Who is the heavenly bread, we may know 
that there is one Body wherewith our whole number is 
conjoined and united.' " ^ 

It will appear plainly enough that this conception of 
Church unity does not confine Church unity to this world, 
but includes within it the departed who are, like us, *in 
Christ.' Further it does not suggest a Head on earth. 
As the instrument of this unity is the Spirit, as its basis 
is Christ the Mediator, so the source and centre of it 

1 Dr. Pusey's Truth and Office of the English Church pp. 56, 
57. A number of Patristic passages will be found collected by 
him p. 45 f. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


is in the heavens, where the Church's exalted Head 
lives in eternal majesty human yet glorified. As the 
bishop is an essential element of the organization of 
each local Church on earth, so he is the centre of local 
unity. " There is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ," so 
cried the father Ignatius, who had lived in the apostolic 
age, " and one cup unto union in the blood : there is one 
altar as there is one bishop, together with the presbytery 
and the deacons." But as the Church in each place 
exists only to bring man into relation to Christ and to 
the redeemed humanity which Christ is gathering to 
Himself in the unseen world, so the catholic Church, 
the society which each local Church represents, has its 
centre of unity in Christ. " Where the bishop appears, 
there let the people be \ as where is Christ Jesus, there 
is the catholic Church." ^ Each local Church exists to 
keep open the connection of earth and heaven : to keep 
the streams of the water of life flowing. Of course each 
has a necessary connection to all the others in the 
witness of truth and in the fellowship of love — we will 
go on to think of that — but their primary point of union, 
the centre to which they all converge, is nothing less than 
Christ. The matter cannot be summed up better than 
in a typical quotation from St. Augustine, which puts this 
thought in vivid simplicity : " Since the whole Christ is 
made up of the Head and the body — the Head is our 
Saviour Himself, who suflered under Pontius Pilate, 
who now, after He has risen from the dead, sits at the 

* Ignatius ad Smyrn. 8. "The bishop is the centre of each 
individual Church, as Jesus Christ is the centre of the universal 
Church. "— Lightfoot. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


right hand of God : but His body is the Church ; not 
this Church or that, but the Church scattered over all 
the world ; nor that only which exists among men now 
living, but those belonging to it also who were before 
us and are to be after us to the end of the world. For 
the whole Church, made up of all the faithful, because 
all the faithful are members of Christ, has its Head 
situate in the heavens which governs this body : though 
It is separated from their sight, yet It is bound to them 
by love." 1 

When therefore Roman Catholics speak thus^: "There 
are two intrinsic notes of the Church, m., one regarding 
its constitution, viz., that unity of government which 
excludes all schismatical divisions within the body of 
the Church; and one regarding its life, m., holiness 
of government"; when they speak of the Church as 
*** compacted and fitly joined together' with a head 
appointed by Christ Himself' in virtue of an ordered 
hierarchy centering in the Pope ^ ; when they argue that 
two parts of the Church permanently diverging must at 
last annihilate unity, as a civil war carried to its bitter 
end makes one nation two— when they argue thus, they 
are making the unity of the Church primarily an external 

^ St. Aug. on the Psalms Ps. Ivi. I. 

2 The True Basis of Christian Fellowshipy Bishop Meurin, S.J., 
D.D., p. 32. (It was this book in view of which these papers were 
first written.) 

3 The True Basis etc. p. 70. Cf. Father Gallway's Lectures on 
Ritualism v. p. 175 f. He challenges us to say that " the Head " 
whom St. Paul exhorts us * * to hold " is the Invisible Head, Christ ! 
Only * a Low Churchman or dissenter ought to say so. ' Then we 
may safely be low churchmen or dissenters in company with St. 
Augustine and the fathers, and the best Roman Commentators, 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


one, a unity of visible association, the unity which comes 
of subordination to the same external rule. That this is 
thoroughly unscriptural has been shown above. That 
it is inadequate will be seen sufficiently from the con- 
sideration that it would exclude the faithful departed 
from the unity of the Church in its primary sense. 
For the faithful departed are beyond and above the 
visible hierarchy on earth. They are in the unity 
of the Church because that unity is not only of this 
world — because the Body of Christ has, so to speak, 
but its lower limbs here on earth. The Church on 
earth is but the visible portion of a great invisible 
whole bound altogether in the same order of super- 
natural life. 

** One army of the living God, 
To His command we bow ; 
Part of the host have crossed the flood, 
And part are crossing now." 

Mr. Rivington again is making the same mistake 
when he postulates in the passage quoted above a visible 
head to the Church on earth. He implies that the un- 
seen Christ and the faithful departed belong to a differ- 
ent " order of life " from the visible body. He would 
make the Church on earth a complete thing in itself. 
It is enough to point out how blankly his words contra- 
dict what was just quoted from St. Augustine. The 
Pope becomes, according to this idea, not a primus 
inter pares among bishops, but a quasi-sacramental 
head, as being the mediator between Christ and 
His people. Mr. Rivington, indeed, so describes 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


him.i I shall have occasion in a later chapter to trace the 
growth of this quite unprimitive and uncatholic idea. 
Meanwhile I think enough has been said to show that 
the true idea of Church unity makes it consist J>rtmari/y 
in the derivation of the life of the Spirit from Christ, 
down the channels of His organized society, not in sub- 
jection to an external hierarchy centering in the Pope. 
And this true theory as logically excludes a "sacra- 
mental " Headship on Earth, as the false theory certainly 
postulates it. 

* St. Peter (as Head of the Church) is " the sacrament of the 
administrative power of the one Lord over all " p. 72. ** The 
Papacy is, as it were, the Eucharist of Christ's government in His 
Church," p. 21. Cf. the Primary Charge of the Bishop of Lincoln 
(Parker), p. 28 : "though we would grant the See of Rome her 
ancient primacy, yet we cannot accept it as it is now offered, 
transformed into a ^«rtx/-sacramental Headship. " 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



Hitherto we have been brought to the conclusion 
that the primary constituent of Church unity is that 
inward supernatural life, that life of the Spirit, which she 
derives through sacramental channels from Christ her 
Head. But besides this unity of life there is a unity of 
truth, for truth, as well as grace, came by Jesus Christ. 
There is not only *one body' but *one faith.' There 
is a * tradition,' * a form of sound words ' committed to 
the Church in the persons of the Apostles, which is to 
be the * mould '^ of the Christian character so long as 
the world remains. To the holding of this truth every 
Christian person or community is bound, and its wilful 
rejection is what constitutes heresy. 

It follows that the Church is not only, through her 
sacraments, the household of grace : she is also the 
" pillar and ground of the truth " : she has the authority 
of a divinely authorized teacher, and her legislative 
enactments in the sphere of truth, no less than of 
discipline, have a divine sanction. What she binds on 

^ Rom. vi. 17 : " The mould of truth into which ye were de- 
livered " (literally). 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


earth is bound in heaven. And thus Tertullian^ has 
two questions to ask of any claimants to represent the 
Church — not only * have you the apostolic succession ? ' 
but also *do you hold the apostolic truth?' It is 
then our present task to inquire what this teaching 
authority of the Church means, in order to be able to 
answer the question whether the Infallibility of the 
Roman bishop is its logical outcome. 

First let it be clear that the Church's function is not 
o reveal truth. The revelation given once for all to the 
Apostles cannot be either diminished or added to. It is 
a " faith once for all delivered/'^ and the New Testa- 
ment emphasizes the Church's duty as simply that of 
* holding fast ' and teaching what she has * received.' The 
apostle St. Paul himself claims that his converts should 
repudiate him — should treat him as anathema — if he 
were to teach anything else than what he taught at first.^ 
It is thus of the very essence of the Christian revelation 
that as originally given it is final. Whatever is new to 
Christian theology in substance, is by that very fact 
proved not to be of the faith. This is a commonplace of 
patristic theology, and it is admitted by the modern 
Roman Church. " First of all " says Dr. Newman " and 
in as few words as possible, and ex ahundanti cautela : 
every Catholic holds that the Christian dogmas were in 
the Church from the time of the Apostles ; that they 
were ever in their substance what they are now ; that 
they existed before the formulas were publicly adopted, 
in which as time went on they were defined and re- 

1 de Praescrip. 32. ^ g^^ j^^g ^ [R.V.]. 

8 Gal. i. 8, 9. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


corded."^ Even the Montanists in ancient time who 
bad a theory of development in discipHne, maintained 
the unchangeableness of the *rule of faith.' On this 
subject the * Reminder' {Commonitortum) of Vincent 
of Lerins has been commonly taken as a summary of 
patristic teaching, and it is this recognised ancient 
text - book on the question of Church authority 
which elaborates the famous formula to express the 
true creed — that it is what has been held in the 
Christian Church * everywhere, always, and by all.' 
Vincent, then, is never weary of reiterating that novelty 
is the test of error, antiquity of truth. ** To teach any- 
thing to cathoHc Christians 2 besides what they have 
received, has never been allowed, is nowhere allowed, 
never will be allowed ": "St Paul repeats and reiterates 
that if any one announces a new dogma, he is to be 
anathematized."^ An inquirer who would know the 
truth when any novel error tries to spread its conta- 
gion over the whole Church at once, is "to cling to anti- 
quity, which is quite beyond being seduced by any 
deception of novelty."^ He is, as Cyprian says,^ 
when the stream of present Church teaching becomes 
in any way defective, to go to the source and repair 
what is amiss. Manifestly these writers would not toler- 

^ Tracts Theol, and Eccl, p. 287. Cf. Keenan's Controversial 
Catechism ed. 1846 p. 117. "Can a General Council frame new 
matters or articles of faith ?" ** No ; a General Council can only 
explain what has been already revealed : it belongs to God only to 
reveal new articles of faith." 

2 He excludes not only what is contrary to {contra) but what is 
* beside * the original deposit [prcBter)^ cc. 20 and 28. 

3 C. 9. ' C. 3. ** Ep. 74, 10. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


ate any depreciation of * primitiveness ' as a test of 
truth. 1 

It is not then a matter which needs proving, that 
novelty in revelation is equivalent to error, according to 
the fathers. But this evident proposition leads to an 
important conclusion. It follows that the authority of 
the Church is of a more secondary character than is 
sometimes supposed. She is not a perpetual oracle of 
divine truth, an open organ of continuous revelation : 
she is not so much a ' living voice ' as a Hving witness 
to a once-spoken voice. And it will be observed that 
whereas the former idea of the Church's function 
would naturally suggest the probability of a * central 
shrine,' where the oracle would be given, a central 
teaching chair of Christendom — on the other hand the 
latter idea, that of a witness, suggests the concurrence of 
manifold traditions. The strength of promulgative 
authority is centrality; the strength of witness is 
the consent of independent and distinct voices. Now 
it is this latter idea of Church authority which is un- 
deniably that of the fathers, always excepting those of 
the papal school ^ in and after the fifth century. When 
Tertullian confronts the Gnostics with the consent of the 
different Churches who derived their life and doctrine 

^ As Bp. Meurin depreciated it, True Basis etc. pp. 30-34. 
Antiquity is, in Vincent's conception, an additional test of truth, 
besides universality, chap. 27. 

'^ I believe, pace Mr. Rivington, that this phrase, as I use it, 
expresses the truth. Papalism began, like the Immaculate Con- 
ception, in being the opinion of a school, however much it after- 
wards won general acceptance in the Churches of the Roman 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


from the Apostles, in a creed the opposite of theirs, 
when he bids them attend to this consent of Corinth, 
Ephesus, and Rome, when he asks, in one of his in- 
comparable epigrams whether it is probable that so 
many Churches of such importance should have 
hit by an accident of error upon an identical creed; 
and adds that what is found the same amongst so 
many, can owe its identity only to its being received 
by all from a single source,^ it is obvious that he 
is viewing the Church's authority as based on the 
convergence of independent testimonies. He is but 
taking his idea from Irenaeus,^ who appeals to the 
fact that whatever languages the different Churches 
talk, be they civihzed or barbarous, they bear witness 
to the same creed. This is the principle underlying 
the authority of general Councils — that their * genera- 
lity ' secures the elimination of what is merely local or 
individual and the exaltation of the common heritage. 
So Vincent of Lerins explains the procedure of the 
general Council of Ephesus. The authorities of eastern 
fathers, he tells us, were first recited on the question 
at issue : then " that not Greece and the East only, 
but the West and the Latin world as well might be 
proved to have always held the same sentiments," some 
authorities were quoted from Rome. After that, " that 
not the head of the world only but the outlying 
portions (sides) of it also might give their witness to 
the judgment," authorities of previous ages were cited 
from Africa and Milan.^ Here then is a clear in- 

^ de Praescn 24-36. 2 \ jq 2^ iii. 4. 2. 

^ Comm. 30. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


telligible principle of consentient witness, eliminating 
local and individual peculiarities, and it must be 
allowed to be the principle of the fathers in general 
and of the Ecumenical Councils. Indeed it is only 
when we keep this principle in mind that the deference 
we pay to the decisions of general Councils becomes 
intelligible. The tone of the actual meeting was some- 
times polemical and embittered ; that is true at least of 
the Council of Ephesus, so that it does not present the 
appearance of a trustworthy spiritual guide, or of a good 
court of final appeal. But our deference to them be- 
comes quite intelligible when they are considered simply 
as machinery for registering the agreement of the 
Churches, and when it is further borne in mind that 
their authority only became decisive after their verdict 
had been accepted in the Church at large. ^ 

The authority of the Church then is the subordin- 
ate authority of a witness to the truth, a guardian, 
a teacher of it; she has no authority to promul- 
gate or reveal new truth. Thus when the popes 
began to speak of the * secret stores ' of divine truth 

^ Three points need to be remembered with reference to these 
councils : (i) That what was finally authoritative was not the mere 
council, but the decree of the council when the bishops had 
separated and their decision had obtained general acceptance. 

(2) That the councils simply professed to register and enforce 
the traditions of the Churches, leaving argument to the theologians. 

(3) That our justification in accepting the decisions of the 
councils lies in the verification of their results taken together. It 
is most reassuring to find that they represent, not the tyranny of 
chance majorities, but the gradual working out into a balanced 
formula of the complex scriptural truth of the Incarnation — 
guarding it from being overbalanced on one side or the other. 
The Mind of the Spirit is apparent in the result. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


{arcana) committed to the see of Peter upon which 
she can draw so as to be the central oracular voice of 
Christendom, giving replies to the Church in her need,^ 
they are beginning to speak in a quite new strain and 
to give to the Church's authority a new meaning. And 
it must be observed that this papal idea of a central 
voice, while it is the natural expression of the idea of 
promulgative authority, and falls in with the general im- 
perialist tendencies of the Roman Church, is disastrous 
to the Church's function as a consentient witness. The 
very centralization of the Roman development removes 
the security, which the general Councils, truly used, 
were calculated to provide, against any local tendency 
becoming dominant. Thus the Roman centralization 
is the main cause of what we have already noticed in 
Roman Catholicism — its one-sidedness. The counter 
tendencies of other parts of the Church ought to have 
kept the whole deposit of the faith unnarrowed, by 
preventing Roman ideas being elevated into catholic 

According then to the older and really catholic view, 
the later Church can never know what the early Church 
did not. She can never have substantially clearer light 
about the intermediate state, for example, or the relation 
of the departed to the living, or the ' treasury of merits,' 
or the position of Mary, than the Church of the second 
century had. The revelation receives no augmentation, 
and what for our discipline was left obscure at first, 

^ See on the beginning of this tendency in the utterances of 
Pope Innocent I. in the fifth century, Langen's Geschichte der 
romischen Kirche p. 737. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


must remain obscure, according to God's providence, 
till our fragmentary knowledge^ becomes complete in 
the Day of Light. 

Thus we mean broadly by the doctrine which comes 
on the authority of the Church, the doctrine which 
has been recognised and explicitly taught ^ by the legi- 
timate members of the Christian brotherhood in all ages 
and all parts of the world : we mean * historical Chris- 
tianity.' Is there such a thing ? Undoubtedly : and we 
may add that the whole body of catholic theologians, 
Roman no less than Anglican, are committed to there 
being this body of catholic truth, held * ubique,' that is 
in all parts, as opposed to any one particular Church : 
* semper' always, as opposed to only in recent ages : *ab 
omnibus ' by all, i,e, by the general body of the Church, 
as Vincent explains, not merely as the private opinion 
of particular teachers. It will be worth while to quote 
the summary of the catholic tradition as it is given us 
for example by Origen in the East, early in the third 
century, and by Irenaeus in the West, in the latter part 
of the second. 

Tradition, according to Origen, " tells us that there is 
one God, who created all things out of nothing, who is 
just and good, the Author of the Old as of the New 
Testament, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ : that 
Jesus Christ was begotten of the Father before every 
creature, that through Him all things were made, that 

^ I Cor. xiii. 9-12. We know * in part,' not all : we see a dim 
reflexion in a mirror. 

* Explicitly : thus TertuUian specially excludes all idea of a 
secret tradition — de Fraescr, 25-27. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


He is God and Man, born of the Holy Spirit and the 
Virgin Mary, that He did truly suffer, rise again, and 
ascend into heaven : that the Holy Ghost is associated 
in honour and dignity with the Father and the Son, 
that it is He who inspired the saints both of the Old 
and of the New Dispensation: that there will be a 
resurrection of the dead, when the body which is sown 
in corruption will be raised in incorruption, and that in 
the world to come the souls of men will inherit eternal 
life or suffer eternal punishment according to their 
works : that every reasonable soul is a free agent, plotted 
against by evil spirits, comforted by good angels, but in 
no way constrained : that the Scriptures were written by 
the agency of the Spirit of God, that they have two 
senses, the plain and the hidden ; whereof the latter can 
be known only to those to whom is given the grace of 
the Holy Spirit in the word of wisdom and knowledge.'* ^ 
This he " gives as * the teaching of the Church ' trans- 
mitted in orderly succession from the apostles, and 
remaining in the Churches to the present day," as the 
authoritative standard of belief. 

Now let us listen to Irenaeus: "The true know- 
ledge" (so he calls the Christian religion) "is the 
doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient system of 
the Church in all the world : and the character of 
the body of Christ, according to the successions 
of the bishops, to whom they (the Apostles) delivered 
the Church in each separate place: the complete use 
(moreover) of the Scriptures which has come down 

^ See Dr. Bigg's Bampton Lectures p. 152. This *rule of 
faith ' is abbreviated from the Preface to the De Principiis. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


to our time, preserved without corruption, receiving 
neither addition nor loss; its public reading without 
falsification ; legitimate and careful exposition according 
to the Scriptures, without peril and without blasphemy : 
and the pre-eminent gift of love." Again, "The way 
of those who belong to the Church is encompassing the 
whole world, because it holds the tradition firm from 
the Apostles, and enables us to see that the faith of all 
is one and the same, while all accept one and the same 
God the Father, and believe the same dispensation of 
the Incarnation of the Son of God, and acknowledge 
the same gift of the Spirit, and meditate the same 
precepts, and preserve the same form of that ordination 
which belongs to the Church, and expect the same 
coming of the Lord, and await the same salvation of 
the whole man, both soul and body." ^ 

Origen and Irenaeus are not speaking exhaustively, 
and there can be no reasonable doubt that as a 
matter of mere historical evidence, the Church always 
believed not only in the Trinity and the Incarnation in 
the fullest sense, in the Atonement won in Christ, 
and in the Inspiration of Scripture, but also in the 
visible Church, in the apostolic ministry, in the sacra- 
ments as channels of grace, and in the Eucharistic 
sacrifice. 2 

Of this sort then is the historic creed of Christendom, 
which has been held and publicly taught as Christianity 
over the whole area of the Church. The denial of any 

^ See Irenaeus, iv. 33. 8, v. 20. i. 

' On the three last points I may refer to The Church and the 
Ministry ^'t^ esp, p. 213 : and cap. vii. p. 78 note *, p. 226 note *. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


of these elements of belief has always brought a man 
under suspicion and in the last resort constituted him a 
formal heretic. The Church had indeed immense diffi- 
culty in formulating her theology — for example, in 
making out of human language a formula to guard the 
truth of the Trinity. There is therefore a certain 
ambiguity of language on some points in the early 
theology, though this fact easily admits of being exagge- 
rated. But there is in substance an outspoken expres- 
sion of this body of truth, in the strictest sense catholic, 
in the Church. It does not require any very profound 
or wide reading to discover that the early Church did 
believe in the sacraments, though the belief was not 
formulated into dogmas, and did not believe in a 
treasury of merits which the pope could dispense in 
indulgences, or an immaculate conception of the 
blessed Virgin, or an infallibility of the pope. But of 
this somewhat more hereafter. 

And how does this 'general consent' express itself ? 
Let Vincent of Lerins answer. Let us hear what he 
bids the perplexed inquirer do, amid the manifold 
heresies of the fifth century, to ascertain the true faith. 
First he is to seek the authority of general Councils, 
where such have been held. Their decrees rank first, 
as authorized and final interpreters of Scripture. But 
if a new question arises on which no such Council has 
spoken, then he is to collect the sentiments of the 
ancients ; of those, that is, who remained in the com- 
munion of the Church, masters of repute. And here 
care is to be taken to adhere to no individual opinion of 
however great a Christian, but to that teaching only in 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


which they are found to agree.^ This advice is given 
to ordinary individual Christians again and again. 

And now what is the Roman objection to the idea of 
authority which has just been explained ? It may be said 
to be threefold. 

(i) It will be said ^ : "It is not easy then to find out 
what is catholic on your showing. We have contra- 
dictory statements made about what the fathers teach. 
How are we — not professed theologians or even students 
— to find out the *rule of faith'? The Roman idea of 
Church authority gives a simpler remedy for our diffi- 
culties. Theirs is a rule of faith of easy access." 

This pleading needs a manifold answer. It needs 
first of all to be said that the fathers had no such short 
and easy way of finding out the truth to recommend to 
applicants,^ and we would add that in the early centuries 

^ cc. 28, 29. 2 As by Mr. Rivington p. 29. 

3 See Mahan's Exercise of Faith p. 68. ** Let us take such a 
case, for example, as that so graphically described by St. Chryso 
stom ; a case which might have occurred at any time during the 
first six centuries, and which may occur every day now. A heathen 
comes forward desiring to be a Christian. He consults so eminent 
and enlightened a bishop as St. Chrysostom, He says, * I desire 
to be a Christian, but to whom shall I attach myself? In the con- 
tention, and division, and confusion among you all, which dogma 
shall I take ? Which shall I prefer ? Since all of you profess to 
hold the truth, which shall I believe ? I know nothing at all of 
Scriptures; and they who profess to know, produce the same 
proofs for their respective tenets.' To this Chrysostom replies, 
* I am glad that all parties agree thus far ; for if we referred you 
only to reason, you might be justly at a loss ; but if we send you 
to the Scriptures, and they are simple and true, your decision is 
easy : for whoever accords with them, he is a Christian ; but who- 
ever is at variance with them is very far from it, ' But the man 
rejoins, * I have searched the Scriptures, and find that they teach 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


such short and easy method was, it would appear, 
more * imperatively needed ' than it has ever been since. 
There was never, perhaps, a time of confusion in the 
Christian Church equal to the second century. Chris- 
tianity seemed to the philosopher outside a chaos of 
dissentient sects, " agreeing in nothing but the name." ^ 
The various forms of Gnosticism were so seductive that 
Tertullian witnessed in his day the spectacle of "one 
and another — the most faithful, the wisest, the most 
experienced in the Church, going over to the wrong 
side.*'^ The points under discussion were the most 
fundamental conceivable, the questions of the creation 
of the world, the unity of God, and the reality of the 
Incarnation. If ever a clear rule of faith, a papal 
voice, a centre to Christendom was needed, it was then. 
But not only had the Church at that time to struggle 
through her difficulties without an infalHble teacher, 

one thing, and you another. What, then, am I to do? Must I 
make myself a teacher, when I know nothing of the matters at 
issue, and desire merely to be a learner ? ' 

"Now here is the point at which, if anywhere, the infallible 
guide is needed. This is the case that demands the simple explicit 
answer to the question, * Whom and what shall I believe?' And 
if Chrysostom and other Church teachers of the first six centuries 
could give no such single test of truths and no such absolute direc- 
tion as the case demanded, it proves either that they knew no such 
simple direction ; or else, if they knew it, that they handled the 
word of God deceitfully, and perplexed the simple souls whom 
it was their business to guide. In this particular instance, St. 
Chrysostom, after asking the man whether he had not a mind and 
judgment of his own^ proceeds to give him such marks of the true 
Church as he could, and leaves him to make his way clear through 
the mazes of this complex guidance." (St. Chrysostom Homilies 
on the Acts, xxxiii. in Library of Fathers part ii. pp. 462-7). 

^ Origen c. Cels. iii. 12. '^ de Praescr. 3. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


she had not even yet formulated her creeds or settled 
her canon. Once more, the years of the Arian contro- 
versy were years of deepest distress. Again a papal 
voice of authority was sorely needed, if ever. But in 
the moment of uttermost strain and profoundest peril, 
the pope did something very different from giving a 
clear voice for the guidance of Christians. He re- 
pudiated Athanasius the great upholder of the truth, 
and left him alone * against the world.' ^ The fact is, 
the argument from the supposed needs of man to the 
institution of an infallible teaching chair breaks down 
historically from the fact that, in the hours of greatest 
need in the Church, there was no remedy such as it is 
now suggested that man imperatively requires — there 
was no quick method of finding out the truth. And 
indeed is not this difficulty, this requirement of patience, 
in finding out the truth, the very probation of faith ? 
It is just what is suited to our time of discipline. At 
any rate we have no right to claim of God the removal 
of certain difficulties. We must take His revelation 
under the conditions on which He gives it, and endure 
what the fathers endured. We make a great mistake 
about the essence of faith if we imagine that faith is 
merely the surrendering of our reason and the passive 
acceptance of an unmistakeable voice of external 
authority. Faith, in the Bible, is opposed not to 
reason^ but to sight. It was not Christ's will to re- 
veal Himself beyond all possibility of doubt. He 
did not utter a dogma about Himself and bid men 
bow down to it. The faith which could accept Him 
^ See chapter vi. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


had to see through a veil. When men complained 
that He kept their souls in uncertainty, when they 
importunately asked to be 'told plainly/^ He made 
no response to their complaint, except to attribute 
their unbelief to their not being * His sheep.' Faith 
is an inner sense which faithfully and perseveringly 
apprehends God in spite of difficulties and through 
the veil. The faith which was required to believe in 
Christ in spite of ambiguities is the same faith which 
is required to believe in the Church. And practically 
a prayerful and patient Christian can find out the 
mind of the Church with quite sufficient security. The 
current teaching of the Church about what is contained 
in the Creeds, and about the Sacraments and Ministry 
has almost always been sufficiently explicit and clear 
for simple minds. The poor and uneducated must of 
course depend on their immediate teachers who may 
from time to time have been defective,^ but men's re- 
sponsibilities under such circumstances are limited by 
their opportunities, and generally on these points the 
Church's teaching has been sufficiently constant and 
explicit, and has afforded a basis of security in the 
strength of which it is probably good for every Christian 
to feel a certain amount of hesitation and to experience 
the necessity of feeling his way. 

(2) But it is objected further: *an authority which 
leaves you partly dependent on your own reason and 
judgment is no authority at all. To accept authority is 
the opposite of what you call " feeling one's own way." ' 

» St. John X. 24. 

2 I am not yet speaking about the English Church. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


To this it is only necessary here to give a brief answer. 
Authority is not the same thing as absolutism, which is 
only an exaggerated and perverted form of it. True 
authority does not issue edicts to suppress men's 
personal judgment or render its action unnecessary, but 
it is like the authority of a parent, which invigorates 
and encourages, even while it restrains and guides 
the growth of our own individuahty. I do not wish 
to enlarge on this idea here, but I am sure I shall 
do well to repeat a question asked long ago on this 
subject " Is a limited, conditional government in the 
State such a wise, excellent, and glorious constitution ? 
And is the same authority in the Church such ab- 
surdity, nonsense, and nothing at all, as to any actual 
power ? If there be such a thing as obedience upon 
rational motives, there must be such a thing as au- 
thority that is not absolute, or that does not require 
a blind, implicit obedience. Indeed, rational creatures 
can obey no other authority; they must have reasons 
for what they do. And yet because the Church claims 
only this rational obedience, your Lordship explodes 
such authority as none at all."^ I must protest that 
the authority of the Church is, as we Anglicans under- 
stand it, a most real guidance of our spirit and intellect 
to which, by God's mercy, we love to submit ourselves. 
Submission to that authority is the merging of our mere 
individualism in the whole historic life of the great 
Christian brotherhood; it is making ourselves at one 
with the one religion in its most permanent and least 

^ Law's First Letter to the Bishop of Bangor in his Works 
[ed. 1762] i. pp. 30, 31. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


merely local form. It is surrendering our individuality 
only to empty it of its narrowness. One with the 
Christianity of history, the Christianity of creeds and 
councils, we enter into the heritage of her dogmas and 
of something as great as her greatest dogmas, the whole 
joy of her sacraments, the security of her ministry, the 
communion of her saints, the fellowship of her Spirit. 
We can read her great fathers and find ourselves one 
with them in all important matters of faith ^ over the 
lapse of ages. The hearts of the fathers are seen to 
be turned towards their children. We believe in the 
Holy Catholic Church. 

(3) * But, it is said (and it is the last objection I will 
consider) that on your showing the final court of appeal 
is no longer open to you. You can no longer summon 
a general council, or what you would acknowledge as 
such.' To this our answer is partly that we admit our 
grievous loss, but it is not our fault. With what infinite 
joy would we hail its possibility ! But there is a further 
answer. A general council is not a necessity. It was 
impossible from one set of causes for the first three 
hundred years, but all through that period men like 
Irenaeus and TertuUian were not prevented from arriv- 
ing at the mind of the Church by the comparison of 
traditions. "The judgment of the Church diffusive^^ 
says Mr. Wilberforce " is no less binding than that of 
the Church collectiveJ^ 2 The consent of the Church as 
it was discoverable before general councils were pos- 

^ Not of criticism or of science, however, which are progressive 
in a sense in which Revelation is not. 
2 Principles of Church Authority p. 77. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


sible from one set of reasons, so is still discoverable by 
us since they have become impossible from another. 
Beyond this we must content ourselves with councils 
less than ecumenical, though resting on their basis, and 
it is quite possible that it was not intended in God's 
providence that the formulation of ecumenical dogmas 
should go beyond defining the basis of the Christian 
faith and life, as it is given in the Creeds. The imposi- 
tion of a dogma as a condition of communion is a 
necessary evil which should be kept within the smallest 
limits possible in view of the Church's safety : and a 
Church shows her life not by creating new dogmas but 
by living on the old faith and * commending it to every 
man's conscience ' by rendering it intelligible in view of 
new needs to new generations of men. 

It is necessary to lay down briefly, before we conclude, 
the sense in which we can accept of * development ' in 
Christian truth. In such sense as makes it concerned 
only with the statement of truth, we accept and indorse 
the idea. In this sense Vincent of Lerins makes it the 
Church's duty to develop truth. His words are exact 
and well worth quoting ^ : " The Church of Christ, the 
anxious and careful guardian of the truths committed to 
her, never changes anything in them, diminishes nothing, 
adds nothing, neither cuts off what is needful, nor 
appends what is superfluous : does not lose what is her 
own, nor incorporate what is not, but devotes all her 
pains to this one task — by dealing faithfully and wisely 
with old truths, to give perfection and finish to whatever 
was of old left shapeless and inchoate ; to consolidate 
^ Common, c. 23. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


and establish what has been already expressed and 
developed; to preserve what has been already estabhshed 
and defined. . . . When she was roused by the novelties 
of heretics, the catholic Church, by the decrees of 
Councils, has ever effected this and nothing more — 
that she should consign to posterity in the security of a 
formal document, what she had received from her 
ancestors by mere tradition, summarizing great matters 
in a few words, and generally, with a view to greater 
clearness, stamping with the speciality of a new term an 
article of the faith which was not new." 

In reference then to the Church's terminology we 
accept the principle of development, but no further. ^ 
In such sense as can make it cover the extension of 
the substance of the faith, so as to include an article 
such as the Immaculate Conception, — an idea utterly 
outside the horizon of a Chrysostom or an Augustine 
— in such sense we repudiate it. Indeed in her official 
documents the Roman Church herself prefers to take 

^ That is, as touches the faith. In discipline there is confessedly 
development and in the use of the sacraments, provided there is no 
alteration in doctrine. Thus the practice of reserving confirmation 
to a later age, and making it the occasion for a renewal of vows, 
or again the practice of encouraging those who are not at the 
time communicants to ai-sist at the Eucharist, are develop- 
ments in practice and discipline, which involve no development 
in doctrine. I think the maximum of development which is to 
be found in the early Church is that involved in the recognition of 
ordinations administered by heretics. I have briefly traced the 
history of this in The Church ami the Ministry pp. 187-196. But 
in any case the development did not io\xch.the faith of individuals : 
all that was in question was how the official Church was to act in 
the light of her faith about orders, in view of a difficulty ^here 
antagonistic truths seemed to collide. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the line which puts her most in conflict with history, 
and setting aside the larger idea of development, pro- 
claims her modem dogma of the Infallibility as belong- 
ing to the " tradition received from the beginning of the 
Christian faith." 

There is indeed another sense in which the whole life 
of the Church is constantly developing, as she expands 
to embrace new material, and brings forth out of her 
treasury, like a wise householder, things new and old. 
But such developments to cover new needs can never 
antiquate the rule of faith. That is adequate for all 
races, all ages, all contingencies, and as it is with it 
alone that we are at present concerned, so we protest 
that for our * rule of faith ' we own with the ancient 
Church nothing narrower than what was held and taught 
in all parts of the world, and from the first, and as the 
common tradition of the Church at large ; and we are 
sure that any advantages which may be gained by 
narrowing its basis are more than compensated for 
by the infinite evils which accrue from limiting the tra- 
dition of truth within the channel of a single, however 
powerful. Church. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



In this discussion it may be assumed as a point out- 
side controversy that the Bible does not stand alone as 
the rule of faith, any one being permitted to interpret it 
according to his or her isolated judgment.^ It can here 
be taken for granted that, as the Church existed before 
the books of the New Testament were written, as they 
were written for those who were already members of the 
Church and had received her primary instruction ,2 as 
she alone witnesses to the inspiration of some of them,^ 

1 Most of the books of the New Testament, considered merely 
as historical documents, will stand alone without needing any 
witness of the Church, beyond merely such historical witness as 
Church writings give to their existence and diffusion. Thus we 
may trust to merely critical grounds for justifying the historical 
character of the Gospel History. Mere historical evidence will 
show that St. John wrote the fourth Gospel, and that St. Paul 
wrote the epistles to the Corinthians, etc. On the other hand we 
want something more than mere historical evidence to justify the 
position of the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews within the 
canon. Thus the books of the New Testament will not stand 
alone either (i) in their entirety or (2) as all inspired, apart from 
the witness of the Church of which they form a part and to whose 
antecedent authority they themselves testify, e.g. i Tim. iii. 15. 

2 St. Luke i. 4; I Cor. i. 4-7, xi. 2 ; Heb. v. 12. 

3 The synoptic Gospels claim on the face of them to be his- 
torical. They make no claim to inspiration. See St. Luke i. 1-3. 


Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


as she alone collected them into a canon and drew the 
line between the Epistle to the Hebrews in which she 
recognised primary or apostolic authority, and the 
Epistle of Clement or the Shepherd of Hermas in which 
she did not, as finally in history the Bible came out 
into the world simply as the sacred books of a certain 
society, the Church, accessible to her members and 
belonging to her alone — it may be taken for granted, 
I say, that the Bible does not stand alone as giving 
the Christian rule of faith, but the Bible interpreted by 
the Church. The Spirit in the society interprets the 
Spirit in the books. 

Thus we may even assume, at starting, the extreme 
position of TertulHan when he refuses (rhetorically, not 
in fact) even to argue the meaning of Scripture with 
people who do not belong to the historical Christian 
Church.^ "Our appeal (in argument with persons 
outside the Church) must not be made to the Scriptures, 
nor must controversy be admitted under circumstances 
where victory will be either impossible or uncertain or 
not certain enough. For even if a comparison of 
Scripture should not turn out in such a way as to put 
the disputants on a level, still the logical order required 
another question, as yet the only question, to be first 
propounded, — To whom does the faith itself belong? 
Whose are the Scriptures ? From whom, and through 
whom, and where, and to whom has been handed down 
that discipline by which men become Christians ? For 
wherever it shall appear that the reality of the Christian 
discipline and faith are to be found, there will be also 
^ de Praescr, 19, 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the reality ot the Scriptures and of the interpretations 
and of all Christian traditions." 

Assuming this general position as lying behind the 
divergence of the Anglican and Roman branches of the 
Church, a further question arises as to the relation in 
which the authority of the Church tradition stands to 
the authority of Scripture. The view of the Anglican 
Church is clear. Scripture is the sole source of revealed 
truth, " so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may 
be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man 
that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or 
be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." The 
Church finds her sphere of authority only in interpreting 
Scripture. A canon of the convocation which imposed 
on the clergy subscription to the Articles, directs 
preachers " to be careful that they never teach ought in 
a sermon, to be religiously held and believed by the 
people, except what is agreeable to the doctrine of the 
Old and New Testaments, and what the Catholic 
Fathers and ancient Bishops have collected from that 
same doctrine." The Bible is the sole source of the 
faith : the Church is the interpreter. The Church is 
the primary teacher of the truth to her children but 
she sends them to the Scriptures to verify it for them- 

With this position of the Church the Romanist 
writers and authorities are not in the main satisfied. 
The Council of Trent ^ declares that " the truth '' of the 
Christian Revelation **is contained in the written books 
and in the unwritten traditions " and that the Council 
^ Sess. iv. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


" receives and venerates with an equal feeling of piety 
and reverence all the books of the Old and New Testament 
, . . and also the traditions relating as well to faith as to 
morals^ as having, either from the word of Christ Him- 
self or the dictation of the Holy Ghost, been preserved 
by continuous succession in the catholic Church/' The 
teaching of the Roman Church thus makes tradition an 
authority independent of holy Scripture, so that Scrip- 
ture is not the sole source of catholic truth, but an article 
of the faith may rest on Church teaching alone, as a 
sufficient basis in itself.^ This theoretical departure 
from what we propose to show to have been the primi- 
tive conception of the authority of Church tradition, has 
resulted in a corresponding departure from primitive 
practice. The early Church, believing the Bible to be 
the guide of individual Christians in faith and conduct, 
would have all her members well versed in its contents. 
They could safely read the Scriptures for themselves 
and be earnestly exhorted to do so, if only the Church's 
teaching had first given them the right point of view for 
their study. Thus guided by the mind of the Church, 
they were bidden to see for themselves whether the 
whole teaching of the Church was not to be found in 
Scripture. Thus the familiarity of the whole body of 
the people with the original record would serve to 

^ It may be a question whether the Roman Church is dog- 
matically committed to the view of tradition which makes it an 
independent source of truth, parallel to Scripture. The words of 
the Council of Trent can be explained in a more moderate sense, 
and there are some Roman theologians on this side. But the 
practice of the Roman Church and her common teaching is as in- 
dicated above. See on the subject Palmer On the Church ii. 10-18. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


maintain a Scriptural tone and to keep the Church's 
current teaching and system from deterioration. The 
Roman Church, on the other hand, practically makes 
ordinary Christians only come in contact with the 
Bible at second-hand. The Church teaches and the 
laity receive. They are not encouraged to drink for 
themselves at the fountain-head of Scripture.^ It is 
obvious enough what danger this must involve of the 
Church system becoming autocratic, arbitrary, external, 
when the check is removed which a generally diffused 
knowledge of Scripture, always antagonistic to such 
tendencies, is alone calculated to supply. It is also 
obvious what audacity is involved in this withdrawal 
of Scripture into the background, if Christ's intention 
was that Scripture should be the constant practical 
guide of individual souls. We proceed, without further 
discussion, to illustrate by some quotations the relation 
in which the Fathers conceived the Church to stand 
towards the Bible, and the urgency with which they 
pressed on the laity the free Study of Scripture. 

Let us listen first to Vincent of Lerins, who holds, as 
we saw in our last discussion, so remarkable a position 
in relation to the theory of Church authority. 

" Often " he says,^ " have I inquired with great care 
and much earnestness, of very many men eminent for 
holiness and doctrine, how I might, by some certain, 

^ This is admitted by Cardinal Manning in a passage quoted 
in chap, i, and I do not suppose it will be denied. I am of course 
aware that Lacordaire and others recommended the freer use of 
Scripture, but they represented tendencies other than Ultramontane, 
and the fact at least is as Cardinal Manning states. 

' Common, c. ii. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 




and, as it were, general and regular way, discern the 
truth of the catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical 
pravity : and have always received, from all of them, 
an answer of this sort : that I, or any other person, 
wishing to detect the frauds of heretics as they rise, 
and avoid their snares, so as to keep himself in a 
sound faith whole and sound, must, with the help of 
the Lord, fortify his faith in a two-fold manner ; first, 
namely, by the authority of the law of God ; and 
then, in the next place, by the tradition of the catholic 

"Here, perhaps, some one will ask. What need is 
there — seeing that the canon of the Scriptures is perfect, 
and in itself suffices to the full, and more, for all demands 
— that the authority of the ecclesiastical interpretation 
should be joined to it ? Because the holy Scripture, for 
its very depth, is not taken of all in one and the same 
sense ; but its expressions are interpreted diversely, by 
one man in one way, by another in another, so that it 
seems as if almost as many opinions may be gathered 

out of it as there are men It is, therefore, very 

necessary, on account of the vagaries of errors so 
manifold, that the line of interpretation of the propheti- 
cal and apostohcal writings be drawn by the rule of the 
ecclesiastical and catholic sense." 

Again, at the end of his little treatise ^ he sums up 
thus : — 

"We said in the premises, that this always hath 
been, and even at this day is, the custom of Catholics, 
to try and examine the true faith, by these two 
^ Common, c. xxix. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


methods. First, by the authority of the divine canon : 
secondly, by the tradition of the Catholic Church ; not 
because the canonical Scripture is not of itself suffi- 
cient for all things, but because very many expound- 
ing God's word at their own pleasure, conceive 
hereby divers opinions and errors. And for that 
cause, it is necessary that the interpretation of the 
heavenly Scripture be directed according to the 
one only rule of the Church's understanding: only, 
be it observed, especially in those questions upon 
which the foundations of the whole catholic doctrine 

Now I cite an eastern and earlier authority, Origen ^ : 
" In the two testaments every word that pertaineth unto 
God may be sought and discussed, and out of them all 
knowledge of things may be understood. And if any- 
thing remains which Holy Scripture does not determine, 
no other third scripture ought to be received to authorize 
any knowledge, but we must * commit to the fire ' what 
remains, that is, reserve it unto God. For God did not 
will us to know all in the present life, as the apostle 
specially says wc know in part, ... Do not let us, then, 
with the presumption of rashness, assume to ourselves 
the knowledge of everything, lest the same apostle rebuke 
us as knowing neither what they speak nor of what they 
affirm,^^ How, on the other hand, Origen insisted on 
ecclesiastical tradition as guiding our search into Scrip- 
ture, appeared in the citation from him in the last 
chapter. I will only quote one other authority in this 
matter — the authority of the great name of St Athana- 
^ Horn* in Lev, v. 9 torn. ii. p. 212. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


sius.i There is no father more Scriptural than St. 
Athanasius in his method of argument. He insists 
strongly on the sufficiency of Holy Scriptures " in which 
alone is the instruction of religion announced — to which 
let no man add, from which let no man detract — 
which are sufficient in themselves for the enunciation 
of truth," but he also insists that a * point of view ' is 
necessary in reading and interpreting Scripture, and this 
point of view is the * Church's mind.' Where the mean- 
ing of Scripture is doubtful in itself, it is enough that it 
* admits ' an interpretation in accordance with the Faith. 
That is to say, the Church is neither more nor less than 
the authorized interpreter of Scripture. 

The following references will indicate how free the 
Fathers are in urging on Christians the direct study of 
Scripture. "Do not" St. Cyril of Jerusalem says,^ 
speaking even to Catechumens, "do not believe me 
simply, unless you receive the proof of ivhat I say from 

^ It would however be easy to multiply references, see esp. Palmer 
On the Church ii. pp. 10 if. Harold Browne Thirty-Niiu Articles 
on Art. vi. The reference above is to Athanasius adv, Gentes init. 
and Fragm, Fest. Ep, xxxix. St. Basil has a passage de Spir. 
Sanct, xxvii. § 66, which alone (as far as I know) in the writings 
of the first six centuries, appear to countenance strongly the Roman 
view, and to give * the unwritten tradition ' * the same force ' as 
Holy Scripture in what the Church holds and declares. But in 
illustrating what he means, he speaks under the head of tradition 
only of Church practices and rules of discipline (turning to the East, 
the formula of consecration, ceremonies of baptism, etc. ). On the 
other hand, when writing De Fide c. I, he makes the Scripture 
the sole source of the faith. "It is a manifest falling from the 
faith, and an argument of arrogancy, either to reject any point of 
these things that are written, or to bring in any of these things 
that are not written.** Cf. Salmon Infallibility pp. 142-3. 

2 A.D. 348 Catech, iv. 17, 33. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Holy Scripture,^^ And, exhorting his hearers not to 
study the Apocryphal books, he bids them give zealous 
attention to the canonical Scriptures. Again, in his 
next lecture,^ he bids them " keep that faith only which 
the Church is now giving to you and which is certifi- 
cated out of the whole of Scripture." Again, " 'Tis from 
ignorance of Scripture," says Chrysostom, in the begin- 
ning of his Homilies on the Romans^ " that all our evils 
arise ; hence the plague of so many heresies, hence our 
careless lives, our fruitless labours. . . . They err who 
look not to the bright rays of the divine Scriptures, 
because they walk in darkness." ^ When he is preaching 
his running commentaries on the New Testament, he 
recommends his hearers to read the passage on which 
he is preaching before they come to Church, and after- 
wards to keep quiet at home and study it with their 
families. **The source of error," says Pope Leo in his 
famous tome,^ " is that when men are hindered by some 
obscurity in knowing the truth, they run not to prophets, 
or apostles, or evangelists, but to themselves " ; they will 
not "labour in the broad field of Holy Scripture." 
These few examples must suffice. But such quotations 
might be multiplied indefinitely. They illustrate two 
facts : the theory of the fathers that Scripture is the sole 
source of revealed truth — and their practice, based on 
this theory, of enjoining on all Christians its free 

The patristic conception of the rule of faith finds it, 
as we have seen, (a) in the Bible, (b) in the witness of 

1 A.D. 348, Catech, v. 12. ^ Tom. ix. p. 426. 

^ Horn, in Matt. i. v. torn. vii. pp. 13, 72. * Ep. xxviii. i. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


the general Church interpreting the Bible. ^ Let us 
briefly indicate to what results the application of this 
test will lead us. It will lead us to accept first of all 
those central doctrines of the faith, the Incarnation, and 
the Trinity, which the Church has formulated in definite 
dogmas, and which we can, guided by the Church, find 
clearly enough for ourselves in Scripture — ^and also the 
doctrines of the Inspiration of Scripture and of the 
Atonement, which Scripture declares and which the 
Church has always believed and inculcated, though there 
is a remarkable absence of definite dogmas to make an 
exact claim on our belief on these subjects. Next we 
shall accept all that body of truth, which is the " exten- 
sion of the Incarnation " — the doctrines of Baptismal 
Regeneration, of the gift of the Spirit in Confirmation, 
of the Eucharistic Presence and Sacrifice, of the 
Ministry with its authority in Absolution, and of the 
visible Church. Two of these doctrines are more or 
less explicitly stated in the creeds. The rest are 
parts of the universal Church's teaching and are 
also contained, as we can verify for ourselves, in the 
language of Scripture. ^ These too we shall receive as 
* of faith,' even though the absence of definite dogma 
must make us careful in imputing heresy to those 
whose teaching on the subject is not explicit. ^ When a 

1 For a full statement of this principle we may refer to Dr. 
Pusey's famous Sermon on the * Rule of Faith ' in his University 

' If any one doubts whether the Eucharistic sacrifice is taught 
in Scripture, he should refer to Willis' Sacrificial Aspect of the Holy 

^ See Keble's Letters of Spiritual Counsel cxviii-cxxi. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


doctrine is plainly stated in Scripture, like the doctrine 
of eternal punishment, or of man's free-will on the one 
hand, and fallen nature on the other, then the general 
consent of the Church will confirm us in maintaining 
them, and we shall not be restrained from doing so by 
the aberrations of individual teachers. ^ Where a doctrine 
has been commonly held by churchmen, like the actual 
sinlessness of the blessed Virgin, but cannot either plead 
quite universal consent nor the authority of Scripture, 
it will rank rather as a pious opinion than as an article 
of faith. Where an opinion has been held commonly in 
Christendom for a while and then abandoned, without 
being explicitly condemned, as out of harmony with 
Scripture and reason, like the notion of Christ's offering 
His death as ransom to the Devil, then we shall not 
scruple to reject what lacks permanent Church authority 
and scriptural basis. Where finally doctrines, lacking 
any scriptural warrant, come to prevail only in a later 
age of the Church, and only partially then, like the 
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, or of Indul- 
gences on the basis of the Treasury of Merits, doctrines 
ignored or rejected explicitly in the earlier ages, then, 
even without condemning them as positively heretical, 
we shall have no hesitation in declining them with em- 
phatic decision. 2 

1 See Vincent of Lerins* Commonitorium on the trial of the 
Church which consists in the errors of single great churchmen 
(cc. 17 and 18). 

^ I think these, with the Infallibility of the Pope, are the best test 
questions for the rule of faith. Take for instance the immaculate 
conception of the blessed Virgin. There is no passage in Scrip- 
ture which even suggests more than her pre-eminent sanctity 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


It is hardly possible to exaggerate the supreme im- 
portance of holding to nothing else than this ancient 
idea of the rule of faith as lying in the consent of the 
Church and the appeal to Scripture. After all, the 
Church's dogmatic decisions are rather negative than 
positive. They were passed in order to warn us off 
certain false lines of thought and development, while 
for positive information, for growth in spiritual know- 
ledge, they still throw us back on the Christ of the 
Gospels and on the fresh teaching of the apostles. 
Thus it is only by keeping the whole surface of Scrip- 
ture constantly before the eyes of the Church at large, 
that we can have amongst us the real mind of the 
Spirit in all its richness and freedom, so that the 
Church can make fresh starts in view of new needs, 
so that she can bring forth out of her treasures 
things new and old, applying the old faith in new 
ways, because she is drinking constantly through her 
whole body at the original fount of inspiration. It 
is the complexity of our rule of faith — taking in the 

and beatitude. There is further no ancient consent even for 
her actual freedom from venial sins — no evidence at all of any 
one having held her immaculate conception. When the opinion 
arose in the Gallican Church of the 12th century, it is well 
known how St. Bernard denounced the festival instituted in 
honour of it, in the see of Lyons, and in the strongest terms 
repudiated the doctrine. His sentiments were constantly repeated 
by men of note and authority in the Church, and St. Thomas 
Aquinas summed up against the doctrine. Yet the opposite school 
has prevailed, and what was at first undreamt of, what Scripture 
does not hint at, what when it appeared, appeared as the opinion 
of a school repudiated by the greatest mediaeval theologians, has 
finally been raised to the position of a dogma binding on the faith 
of every Catholic. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


whole Church and the Scriptures and the individual, 
which is the guarantee that the faith will not be central- 
ized and narrowed, as it goes down the ages. 

In the strength of such considerations we shall be 
better able to meet the reproaches which are some- 
times aimed at us. For instance, we often hear much 
which would encourage the notion that the Church 
shows her vitality by the ready multiplication of dogmas, 
by the clearness and explicitness and frequency of 
her anathemas. We are far from minimizing the im- 
portance of dogmatic clearness: and we are far from 
denying that the English Church has had too little of it. 
But we must urge that a scriptural tone in theology, a 
scriptural spirit pervading all a Church's literature, is 
at least as essential a sign of healthy life, and there is 
a great deal in Scripture which puts a severe curb on 
the dogmatic temper. ^ 

Further, let us not be alarmed when we are told that 
our rule of faith admits of no certainty. It admits 
indeed of as much certainty and definiteness, as a 
Christian who recognises that truth is not coincident 
with dogmatic formulas can need to ask. Dogma is 
not a substitute for truth, but a guide to its apprehen- 
sion. To accept a dogma on the Church's external 
authority is only the first step to apprehending it for 
ourselves. Indeed till ' dogma ' has ceased to be a mere 
dogma, and become part of our own spiritual apprehen- 

^ See on this subject some remarks in Mill's Sermons on the 
Nature of Christianity Serm. I. The scholastic dogmatists, 
resenting the reserve of mystery, simply explain away such utter- 
ances as that of Christ, St. Mark xiii. 32. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


sion, we are not developed Christians, "spiritual men,"i 
and private judgment is only in error where it refuses 
to be enlightened by the catholic judgment. Scripture, 
the Church's mind, our own spiritual apprehension, are 
the three elements which must combine to produce in 
us the true holding of the Christian creed. 

" These are the three great chords of might, 
And he whose ear is tuned aright 
Will hear no discord in the three, 
But the most perfect harmony." 

In conclusion let us explain in what sense we can 
believe the Church to be infallible. It is in the sense 
that the real mind of the Church is the Holy Spirit, 
and where that mind is clearly expressed we can 
accept its guidance with confidence. It is expressed 
in her ecumenical creeds and dogmas about the 
central doctrines of the faith, and also with quite 
adequate clearness in her ordinary catholic teaching. 
But there is and has been a great deal in the 
Church, that is not of her, for the Holy Spirit 
suffers in His organ, through men's unfaithfulness, and 
His voice speaks not always as plainly as He would 
fain let it speak, through human sin. Hence there 
has been a good deal taught in the Church, from 
time to time, that was not truth. If the truth has 
always been taught, yet it has sometimes been 
clouded by error. Indeed this imperfection in the 
Church's witness must be admitted by every think- 
ing man. A Roman Catholic must recognise with us 
that a theory about Christ's ransom referred to just 
1 I Cor. ii. 15. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


now — 2i theory at present almost universally rejected — 
was once for many generations almost universally held, 
and taught as part of the faith. He must admit that 
the Roman Church held through the Middle Ages, and 
taught authoritatively, a view of the * matter ' and * form ' 
of the Sacrament of Order now condemned. He must 
admit that the Gallican Church, and the Irish Church 
under its influence, repudiated for centuries the Papal 
Infallibility and described it as " no article of catholic 
belief." What does this mean ? That on all showing 
the infallibility of the Church is not inconsistent with 
a great deal of error being also taught within her pale. 
To get at the Church's true mind we must not be con- 
tent to accept the nearest or the loudest voice, but 
according to our opportunities ^^ inside the Catholic 
Church we must look to the consent both of uni- 
versality and antiquity, that we be neither carried 
away from sound unity to the side of schism, nor yet 
cast headlong from antiquity of religion into heretical 
novelties. "1 

^ Vincent, Common. 29. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



A PERSON anxious to arrive at the true conception of 
Church unity and Church authority, who had followed 
us thus far, might fairly urge that v(q had hitherto taken 
no account of some very remarkable words of our Lord 
to St. Peter. " The papal claims," such a person would 
urge, " are made to rest upon Scripture. They are made 
to rest upon the position assigned by our Lord Himself 
to St. Peter in relation to the whole Church, and upon 
the permanence of this relation in the ministerial succes- 
sion." 1 To this promise of Christ to St. Peter, then, 
we will now turn our attention. St. Peter, acting as the 
spokesman of the other Apostles, had just given expres- 
sion to the great conviction which had been slowly 
growing in the minds of the whole band, that the Son of 
Man was the Christ the Son of the living God. This 
outspoken confession of His Divine mission and Nature 
Christ meets and confirms with His most solemn bene- 
diction ; * Blessed art thou ' (so we may venture to 
paraphrase it) * Simon Bar-Jonah : for this conviction is 
not derived from weak human nature, it is a supernatural 

^ St. Matt. xvi. 13-20. 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


communication from above ; and (in virtue of this thy 
profession of it) I also say unto thee that thou art 
Rock-man and upon this rock I will build my Church, 
and the gates of death shall not prevail against it. 
And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven ;i and whatsoever thou shalt prohibit on 
earth shall be prohibited in heaven, and whatso- 
ever thou shalt permit on earth, shall be permitted in 

This passage is, on the face of it, one involving 
several ambiguities. It is difficult, I think, to feel any 
doubt that our Lord is here pronouncing the person 
Peter to be the Rock. The Church as a human society 
is to be built on human characters, and in virtue of 
St. Peter's courageous act of faith in Himself, his 
deliberate acceptance of His Divine claim, our Lord 
sees in him, what he had hitherto failed to find among 
men, a solid basis on which His spiritual fabric may 
be reared, or at least a basis capable of being solidified 
by discipline and experience, till it become a founda- 
tion of rock on which the Church can rest. So far 
our Lord is dealing with St. Peter as a human char- 
acter, but He goes on beyond all question to promise 
to invest him with an office, the office of steward in 
the Divine kingdom, and with a supernatural legisla- 
tive authority. So far our Lord's words bear a plain 

^ i,e, the power of opening and shutting, and generally the office 
of the steward, see Isa. xxii. 20-22. On this expression and on 
the whole passage I must refer to what I have said elsewhere more 
at length — The Church and the Ministry ^ pp. 38 f. and 222 f. 
The underl3ring idea of the passage is admirably expressed by Mr. 
Holland Creed and Character p. 37 f. * The Rock of the Church.' 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


meaning, but after this we enter upon the region of 
ambiguity. St. Peter speaks in this passage as one 
of a body of twelve. Is Christ dealing with him 
as distinct from the others, or as their representative ? 
Is the office to belong to him only or in a special sense, 
or is it to be given to all who share the apostolic com- 
mission ? The ground for this question is left the more 
open by the fact that Christ is not here bestowing an 
office but promising it. The passage is an anticipation, 
Si promise {^ I will^ not ^ I do^) which waits its interpre- 
tation in our Lord's future action, just as His discourse 
about * eating His flesh ' in St. John and His promise to 
*give His flesh' (St John vi. 51) waits its fulfilment at 
the institution of the Eucharist We contend then that 
this is just one of those passages which want interpret- 
ing— ont, of those passages about the meaning of 
which it is not possible to arrive at any certainty with- 
out the aid of the interpretation, whether of Scripture 
itself or of the Church, which is given us to fix its 
meaning, positively and negatively, so far as it can be 

The interpretation put on it by the modem Roman 
Catholic Church, involves two doctrines — first, a doc- 
trine about St Peter, and, secondly, a doctrine about 
the permanence of the Petrine position in the Church 
of all ages. 

I. Our Lord here promised to constitute St Peter, 
as the Rock of the Church, the supreme representative 
of Christ the Rock. He is to be the Vicar of Christ 
to the Church on earth. To him alone is primarily 
given the pastorate of souls and the authority of the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


keys. To the other Apostles these are only given 
mediately through him. Whatever they have, they 
have not directly from Christ, but indirectly from 
Christ through Peter.^ 

2. Furthermore this position which St. Peter holds 
relatively to the whole Church, lives on in the Roman 
see in which St Peter's * privilege' abides unto 
the end, in the form of the universal pastorate and 
(as recently defined) infallibility, of the Bishop of 

Now, without discussing the inherent probability of 
this interpretation (which is here stated very briefly, 
but not with any exaggeration of the claim made), and 
assuming simply, with what is almost excessive modera- 
tion, that the passage does not necessarily involve it, 
but is susceptible of others, — we propose to examine 
whether it can hold in view of the commentary on the 
promise which is afforded — 

1 This position first finds expression in St. I^eo Serm, iv. 2 : 
"Great and wonderfiil, beloved, is the fellowship in Its own power 
which the Divine condescension gave to this man. And if It 
wiUed the other rulers of the Church to have anything in common 
with him, It gave only through him whatever it did not withhold 
from the others." cf. Ep, x, i : **The mystery of this gift the 
Lord willed to belong to the office of all the Apostles in such sense 
as that He made blessed Peter, the chief of all the Apostles, the 
original depositary of it, and that He wills that from him as from 
a sort of Head, His gifts should flow down to the whole Body." 
The same idea is expressed by St. Francis de Sales in a passage 
quoted by Mr. Rivington Authority p. 28: **The Apostles all 
have the same power as St. Peter, but not in the same rank, in as 
much as they have it as delegates and agents, but St. Peter as 
ordinary head and permanent officer." The power of the Apostles 
relatively to Peter, is compared to that of representatives of a king 
relatively to the king. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


(i) by our Lord^s own subsequent words and 
conduct : 

(2) by the language of the Acts and Apostolic 
Epistles, including St. Peter's own : 

(3) by the interpretations of the Fathers. 

(i) It must, we think, be admitted that our Lord's 
subsequent language and conduct do not confirm 
the stronger and more exclusive meaning which has 
been put upon His promise to St. Peter. The 
solemn delegations of ministerial authority given by 
our Lord after His Resurrection, are so given as to 
imply the essential equality of all the Apostles. They 
positively exclude the * mediatorial ' position of St. 
Peter. "As the Father hath sent Me, even so send 
I you " the Apostles in general : " and when He had 
said this, He breathed on them and saith unto them, 
Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; whosesoever sins ye for- 
give, they are forgiven unto them; whosesoever sins 
ye retain, they are retained." " All authority hath been 
given unto Me in heaven and on earth. Go ye there- 
fore and make disciples of -all the nations, baptizing 
them .... teaching them." Thus the Mission to 
represent Christ, as endowed with His authority to 
baptize and to teach, to remit and to retain sins (which 
is the power of the keys in its application to indi- 
viduals) is given to the whole apostolic body at onCe 
and equally. To all equally had the Holy Eucharist 
been committed before His passion. It would seem 
then that what is promised to St. Peter in virtue of 
his confession of Christ's name, is bestowed by our 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Lord equally on all after His Resurrection, and St. 
Peter's primacy which he undoubtedly held in the 
apostolic college, carries with it no distinctive powers, 
but is a personal leadership amongst equals. There are 
indeed special dealings of our Lord with St. Peter. 
Thus before His Passion, when He is warning the 
apostles that * Satan has asked to have them that he 
may sift them as wheat,' He tells Simon in particular 
that He has * prayed for him that his faith fail not ' and 
bids him 'when he is converted, to strengthen his 
brethren.' Mr. Rivington interprets this to mean that 
it was * unnecessary ' for our Lord to pray for all the 
Apostles because * there was one head among them with 
whom they were to be joined ' : so that He prayed for 
one, in order to protect all ! How strangely is this idea 
in contrast with the fact of our Lord's prayer in St John, 
xvii. 9, 10. On this occasion the motive for His singling 
out St. Peter is plain to all who are not blind to facts. 
Thus St. Chrysostom commenting on this incident^ says 
it is because his presumption, as indicated by his self- 
confident professions of loyalty, required rebuke. " He 
said this sharply rebuking him, and showing that his fall 
was more grievous than the others and needed more 
assistance." " Why, if [Satan] asked for all, did He not 
say *I prayed ' for all ? Is it not plain that it is as I said 
above — because He is rebuking him and showing that 
his fall is more grievous than that of the others that He 

^ Tom. vii. p. 785 Horn, in Matt. Ixxxii. 3, but there is a 
tendency to see in the charge * strengthen thy brethren * a sign of 
Peter's primacy in Horn, in Act, Apost, iii., torn. ix. p. 26; but 
cp. on these Homilies, Salmon Infallibility p. 339 ; and below, 
p. 79, note *. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


turns His speech to him ? " Again after the Resurrection 
Christ's threefold appeal to St. Peter and threefold 
pastoral charge, suggests irresistibly the interpretation 
given by the fathers,^ viz. that St. Peter is here reinstated 
in the apostoHc commission that his threefold denial 
might be supposed to have lost him ; it is no pecuHar 
dignity which is being committed to him. Thus St. 
Cyril of Alexandria : " through the thrice-repeated con- 
fession of the blessed Peter was annulled his sin in 
thrice denying: and through our Lord saying, Feed 
my lambs, there is conceived to be a sort of restoration 
of the apostolate already given to him." 

Speaking generally then, we should say that the 
*mediatoriar position of St. Peter in the ministry is 
excluded by our Lord's delegation of official power to 
all the Apostles directly, equally and together, and that 
there is nothing in the Gospels to suggest that St. Peter's 
position among the Apostles was any less personal or 
any more destined to be an abiding fact in the Church's 
ministry than that of St. John.^ Even when our Lord 

^ e.g. St. Cyril in he, and St. Augustin (substantially). So 
also St. Girysostom, who however speaks here of St. Peter's 
primacy as the reason of his being singled out : see a little further 

^ On this subject we quote the following interesting passage from 
the end of St. Augustin's Homilies on St. John : "Two states of 
life, the life of faith on earth and the life of sight in heaven, were 
symbolized by Peter and John, the one by the one, the other by 
the other ; but in this life they both of them walked for a time by 
faith [which Peter represents], and the other,— sight [which John 
represents], they shall both of them enjoy eternally. For the 
whole body of the saints, therefore, inseparably belonging to the 
body of Christ, and for their safe pilotage through the present 
tempestuous life, did Peter, the first of the Apostles, receive the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


was on earth it was not of a sort to prevent James and 
John asking for the foremost positions of honour in His 
kingdom, or the apostles discussing * which of them is 
accounted to be greatest' (St. Matthew xx. 21 ; St. Luke 
xxii. 24). 

(2) As we advance from the Gospels to the Acts of 
the Apostles, the history of the early Church suggests to 
us an obvious interpretation of St. Peter's primacy. He 
was the leader — the * coryphaeus ' of the apostolic band. 
He spoke and acted at first as such, and, as holding 
* the keys of the kingdom of heaven,' opened the door 
to the Gentiles. But his position of leader does not 
seem to carry with it any prerogative of primary import- 
ance. The Apostles at Jerusalem are described as 
** sending him " ^ with St. John to Samaria. Later again 

keys of the kingdom of heaven for the binding and loosing of sins ; 
and for the same congregation of saints, in reference to the perfect 
repose in the bosom of that mysterious life to come, did the Evan- 
gelist John recline on the breast of Christ. For it is not the 
former alone, but the whole Church, that bindeth and looseth sins; 
nor did the latter alone drink at the fountain of the Lord's breast, 
to utter again in preaching those truths of the Word in the begin- 
ning, God with God, and those other sublime truths regarding 
the Divinity of Christ, and the Trinity and Unity of the whole 
Godhead, which are to be yet beheld in the kingdom face to face, 
but meanwhile till the Lord's coming are only to be seen in a 
mirror and in a riddle ; but the Lord has Himself diffused this 
very Gospel through the whole world, that every one of His own 
may drink thereat according to his own individual capacity " {In 
loh, Evang, Tractat. cxxiv. 7). 

St. Peter and St. John each represent, in their single personalities, 
among the Apostles, qualities and powers belonging to the uni- 
versal Church. They stand as types of the Church in certain 
aspects, but the one embodiment is no more permanent than the 

^ Acts viii. 14. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


he occupies no governing position in the Council at 
Jerusalem. Christ's revelation to him, indeed, when 
he opened the door to the Gentiles,^ was a fact which 
must have been conclusive of the question before the 
meeting; but the formal authority, the formal "I 
decide," ^ comes from St. James, and the decree goes 
out in the name of "the Apostles and elders"^ gener- 
ally.* Moreover, St. Peter retires into the background 
of history after this, as St. Paul rises into prominence. 

^ Acts XV. 7-1 1. ^ Acts XV. 19. ^ Acts xv. 23. 

* Bishop Meurin in the controversy which originally gave 
rise to these papers interpreted Acts xv. 12 *all the multi- 
tude held their peace* "as an instance of the deference paid to 
St. Peter in the Council of Jerusalem, and had likened it to the 
present order of the Catholic Church, in which, when the succes- 
sor of St. Peter speaks as such, on a matter of faith, the multitude 
hold their peace." I characterized this interpretation as ** incon- 
ceivably misleading and perverse," as indeed it is. The multitude 
held their peace for no other purpose than to listen to Paul and 
Barnabas. But I referred in my note to ** Fr. Rivington's pamph- 
let * Verify your Quotations ' (in reply to Bishop Meurin) and his 
apposite references to St. Chrysostom's commentary. " Mr. Riving- 
ton is now convinced that Bishop Meurin was right ! {Authority 
p. 60 f.). And further he would annul his reference to St. Chryso- 
stom. The translator in the Library of the Fathers whom Mr. 
Rivington originally followed reversed the order of St, Chryso- 
stom's sentence presumably in deference to the best MSS. which 
he used for his translation, (see Preface p. vii.), but it makes no 
difference. * He had been intrusted with the chief rule * refers 
without any doubt to James ; cf. the opening words of the homily : 
"he was bishop in the Church of Jerusalem and therefore speaks 
last," and the words which follow the passage cited by Mr. 
Rivington, " at first Peter spoke more vehemently, but this man 
[James] more gently, for thus it is always right that one in great 
authority should do, and leave the hard things to others." It 
ought to be noticed that Chrysostom's Homilies on the Acts are 
so carelessly reported that their authorship has been doubted : see 
Salmon Lc, p. 339. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


The history would seem to suggest that St. Peter's special 
function was one which had to do with the opening of 
Church history,^ and this impression is augmented by 
the utterly * unpapal ' tone of St. Peter's own Epistles. 
The * fellow-elder ' who speaks to the other * elders' 
but as a * witness of the sufferings of Christ and a par- 
taker of the glory that shall be revealed ' ^ gives no hint 
that he stands in any special relation to the "Chief 
Shepherd" beyond that in which the other apostles 

As to the evidence of the rest of the New Testament, 
it goes very strongly in the direction of minimizing the 
position of St. Peter. The * twelve foundations ' of the 
Church equal and co-ordinate ^ are the twelve Apostles, 
and this implication of St. John's vision accords well 
with St. Paul's language.* Moreover, if one view can 
exclude another, St. Paul's assertion of his own essential 
apostolic independence,^ and his language about the 

^ This is TertuUian's view {Je Pudicitia c. 21), but his very 
powerful exposition is reduced in authority by the Montanist 
animus of the passage, which is aimed against the perpetuity of the 
power of * loosing * in the Church . 

2 I Pet. V. 1-4. 

3 Rev. xxi. 14. ** Eph. ii. 20. 

' ** Paul an Apostle not from man, neither through man " 
Gal. i. I. "I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, 
but by revelation of Jesus Christ " i. 12. " They of repute '* 
{i.e. the pillar Apostles, James and Cephas and John) "imparted 
nothing to me '* ii. 6, etc. **The Gospel of the uncircumcision 
was committed unto me, as the Gospel of the circumcision was 
unto Peter " ii. 7. There is no sort of dependence of St. Paul on 
St. Peter which these words do not exclude. The Church officers 
of the next generation to the Apostles, like St. Timothy and St. 
Titus, received their authority and the tradition, not indeed from 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


* pillar Apostles/ exclude the idea of his receiving his 
authority in any way mediately from St. Peter, though 
his visit to him at Jerusalem was no doubt due to a 
certain deference to him as Captain of the Apostolic 

We conclude, then, from our review of Scripture that 
the notion of St. Peter's * mediatorial ' position relatively 
to the other Apostles is excluded positively by St. Paul's 
language and conduct, and (by implication supporting 
this positive evidence) by the silence of the rest of 
Scripture as to any inequality amongst the Apostles. 
St. Peter's peculiar position, we should judge, given him 
in virtue of our Lord's promise, was a leadership in the 
Apostolic band which has its special exercise in the 
Church's earliest days, retires into the background with 
the spread and growth of the Church, and gives no sign 
of its being perpetuated any more than the special 
mission of St. Paul. 

(3) It remains to summarize briefly the evidence of 
the Church Fathers on three points — (a) the meaning 
of *the Rock' in St. Matt. xvi. 18; (p) the special 
position of St. Peter amongst the other Apostles ; 
(c) the permanence of his prerogative in the * see of 
Peter ' at Rome. 

(a) As regards the meaning of the Rock there is no 

men, but through men. On the other hand the apostles received 
immediately from Christ. When Theodoret, wishing to please 
St Leo, to whom he was appealing, speaks of St. Paul as ** be- 
taking himself to Peter that he might carry back from him an 
explanation to those who were raising questions at Antioch" — 
his language must have had a ring of irony to one so versed in 
Scripture as St. Leo. 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


fixity of interpretation amongst the Fathers, and many 
of them, like St. Augustin, give different interpretations 
in different parts of their works. Launoy, the learned 
French divine, is quoted as computing " that forty-four 
fathers understand thi^ passage as a declaration that 
Christ has founded .His Church on the fundamental 
doctrine of His Divinity, which St. Peter so gloriously 
professed. Seventeen fathers only understand that he 
has founded the Church on St. Peter." Granting that 
this represents the general state of the case, it is plain 
which way patristic authority tends ; and the comments 
of, say, St. Augustin and St. Chrysostom will convince 
any candid reader of what is certainly significant, 
namely, that they did not think the interpretation of 
this word a matter which at all affected the basis of 
Church authority, or indeed a very important question 
at all.^ 

{p) As regards the position of St. Peter amongst the 
other Apostles we have statements from a number of the 

1 e.g^ St, Chrysostom on St, Matt, xvi, i8 comments thus: 
^*^ On the rock ' that is, on the faith of his confession," and passes 
on. Just below he speaks of God as having ** made a man that is 
a fisherman more solid than any rock." Later Horn. Ixxxii. 3, 
tom. vii. p. 786, he speaks again of Christ having * built His 
Church on his confession.' St, Augustin finally {Retracts I. xxil) 
bids his reader choose between the interpretation of the Rock as 
St. Peter, which was his earlier view, and Christ as confessed by 
St. Peter, his later. In the Collect for the Vigil of St. Peter and 
St. Paul in the Roman Breviary the rock is interpreted of the 
apostolic confession 'apostolica confessionis petra' : and is not 
this the only reference to the passage in the present Roman service- 
books ? [I quote Launoy*s computation above because I see no 
reason to think it untrustworthy. That St. Peter himself is the 
rock, I have expressed my own opinion above.] 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


fathers. Thus Origen ^ writes : " But if you think the 
whole Church built upon Peter alone, what will you say 
of John, the son of thunder, or each one of the Apostles ? 
And are we to dare to say that the gates of hell shall 
not prevail against Peter only, but that they shall prevail 
against the other Apostles and those who are perfect ? 
Are not the quoted words, * The gates of hell shall not 
prevail against it,' and * Upon this rock I will build my 
Church,' said of them all, and of each single one of 
them ? Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given 
to Peter only, and shall no other one of the blessed men 
receive them ? And if the words, * I will give to thee 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven ' are common to the 
others, how are not all the words, said before and said 
after, said as they seem to be to Peter, also common to 
the others ? For in this place the words, * Whatsoever 
thou shalt bind on earth, etc.,' seem as if they were 
spoken to Peter. But in the Gospel of John, the 
Saviour giving the Holy Spirit to the disciples by means 
of the Breath, says * Receive ye the Holy Ghost,' " etc.^ 
So again from Alexandria, Cyril, in one of his letters to 
Nestorius, which have ecumenical authority, speaks of 
Peter and James as of * equal honour ' as Apostles and 
disciples.^ So much later Theophylact on Matt. xvi. 

1 Mr. Allnatt {Cathedra Petri p. 30) quotes Origen as main, 
taining how highly St. Peter transcends ^^ the others** in power. 
The words are put in capitals. The context when examined shows 
that **the others" means not the other Apostles, but the members 
of the Church generally, and that the point in which he transcends 
is having authority in ** heavens " (plural) not in " heaven " 

2 in Matt, tom. xii. 11. ^ ad Nest, Ep. iii. 5. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


18-19: "They who have obtained the grace of the 
Episcopate as Peter had, have authority to remit and 
bind. For though the ' I will give thee ' was spoken 
to Peter alone, yet the gift has been given to all the 
Apostles. When ? When He said, ' whosesoever sins 
ye remit, they are remitted.' For this * I will give ' 
indicates a future time — the time, that is, after the 
Resurrection." ^ St. Chrysostom very frequently recog- 
nizes the * primacy ' of St. Peter, and calls him " The 
chief of the apostles, the mouthpiece of the disciples, 
the leader of the band." 2 He speaks of St. John and 
St. Paul * allowing him the primacy.' But this cannot 
be strained to imply any essential difference of rank, for 
where he speaks of St. Paul as going up to visit St. Peter, 
on account of this primacy, he adds " not as needing 
anything of him nor of his voice, but as being his equal 

* Tom. vii. p. 647 in Matt. Horn, Ixv. 4 : cf. torn. x. p. 329 in 
I Cor, Horn. xxxv. 5. 

2 Tom. viii. p. 525 in loan. Horn. Ixxxviii. i : ^KKpiros twv 
AirwrrdXcav koI (rrofia tQv fMdrirQv koI Kopvfpi^ rod xopoO. Here he 
distinguishes *the apostles* from * the disciples.* Just below 
where he says " He intrusts to him [Peter] the presidency of the 
brethren . . . and sa)rs, *If thou lovest me preside over the 
brethren ' ** he means * the brethren * to represent * the sheep * of 
Christ i.e, the flock generally. Where lower down he speaks of 
him (p. 527) as appointed by Christ * the teacher not of this see 
(of Jerusalem) but of the whole world, it is by contrast to St. 
James who received only *the throne of Jerusalem.* The term 
* coryphaeus * he applies also to Andrew, James and John, who 
make up * the two pairs of corjrphaei.* (I/om. in Matt, xxxvii. 4. 
tom. vii. p. 420. ) It is noticeable that when he is speaking of the 
election of Judas* successor he mentions three possible methods of 
making it. St. Peter might have asked Christ to give him a suc- 
cessor to Judas simply : or the apostles might have elected simply : 
or St. Peter might have chosen some one himself, see I/opt. in 
Act. Apost. iii. i ; tom. ix. pp. 23-25. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


in honour." 1 So he constantly speaks of St. Paul as 

* the teacher of the world,' and characterizes St John 

* as the pillar of the Churches over the world, having 
the keys of heaven." 2 

In Western theology the only definite view given us 
of St. Peter's relation to the other Apostles (till we come 
to the * mediatorial ' theory, referred to above as belong- 
ing to the Papacy and derived from Leo the Great) is 
that propounded and developed in the African Church 
by her great theologians St. Cyprian, St Optatus, and 
St Augustin. This theory may be briefly stated in St. 
Cyprian's language. It is, that while " the other Apostles 
were what Peter was, endowed with an equal fellowship 
both of honour and power," while "the Lord after His 
resurrection gives equal power to all the Apostles " and 
gives them all equally the pastoral commission, yet He 
built His Church upon one (Peter), to " make the unity 
of His Church plain." ^ This institution of the Church 
in the person of one man first, was a symbolic act to 
emphasize Christ's intention of unity. Peter, when 
Christ speaks to him, after his great confession, is 
addressed (as St Augustin often says) as "the repre- 
sentative of the Church." This is an interpretation of 
our Lord's words to St. Peter which we can all accept, 
and which is quite intelligible. It is quite distinct from 
the mediatorial view, according to which St. Peter is 
something which the other apostles are not, and the 

^ in GaU i. 18 ; torn. x. p. 677 IffdrifjLos &v ah-cp, 

2 Cf. in Gen, Horn, xxxii. 3 ; Ix. 3 5 xxiv. 4 ; torn. iv. pp. 320, 

581, 222. For St, John cf. In loh, Horn, i. i ; torn. viii. p. 2 ; 

cf. torn. vii. p. 368. 
« De Unit, 4. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


source to them of what they are. This latter view 
is indeed markedly excluded by the language of the 
fathers generally, except indeed by those like St. Leo 
who constitute what can be truly called the "papal 
school " of writers. 

{c) It remains for us to inquire what is the patristic 
view about the permanence of St Fetet^s privilege in his 
see. On this subject it is not necessary to say much 
now, as it will come under discussion in the next chapter 
on the growth of the Roman see. For the present it is 
only important to make one point clear — that the claim 
of the Bishop of Rome to be what Peter was among the 
Apostles becomes a claim which, even if recognized, 
does not carry us far when we have once gained a true 
conception of what Peter was among the Apostles. The 
exaggerated claim which we hear through the lips of 
Leo, and which has been referred to above, is based on 
a conception of St. Peter's position the unfoundedness 
of which we have already seen. Meanwhile, even when 
this claim has been reduced to its proper limits and 
made only a claim to be among bishops what Peter 
really was among Apostles, even so the claim of the see 
of Rome to the * Privilege of Peter ' cannot show any 
ancient consent in its favour. Allnatt in his Cathedra 
Petri can at least be trusted to accumulate all the 
legitimate references to the Fathers in support of a 
papal view — indeed he does not often stop here — but 
under the heading "5/. Peter lives and teaches in his 
successors " and " rules in his own see " he cannot quote 
a single Father of the first four centuries, except one 
pope, Siricius (a.d. 386) ; and under the head of " the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


see of Peter " he cannot quote a single Oriental Father 
of the first four centuries,^ except indeed Firmilian of 
Caesarea, who is violently protesting against Pope 
Stephen's conduct, presumably based upon his claim 
to sit in Peter's chair, and mentions the claim without 
expressing his own attitude towards it : " Stephen who 
announces that he holds the see of Peter by succession 
is stirred by no zeal against heretics." ^ In the African 
Church the theory that the Bishop of Rome occupies 
that same position as the * symbol of unity' in the 
whole Church, which St. Peter occupied in Apostolic 
days, came to prevail through the influence of St. 
Cyprian. This interesting view, which in St. Cyprian's 
sense we should be heartily glad to accept, will come 
under discussion shortly. For the present the matter 
must be brought to a close with two observations. 

There is a marked contrast between the authority 
which such a doctrine as the Real Presence of Christ 
in the Eucharist can plead, and that which supports the 
Papal view of the * privilege of Peter.' We accept 
the Real Presence because (a) it was taught by the 
Fathers of East and West from the first ; (b) it is con- 
firmed by the natural meaning of our Lord's words, 
and the language of St. Paul in his epistles. We 
reject the papal interpretation of Christ's promise to 
St Peter, because {a) it cannot show in its favour 
anything approaching to a consent of the fathers — 
indeed there is something much nearer consent in a 

^ e,g, St. Chrysostom in his voluminous works, including letters 
to the Pope, affords no testimony, though he speaks often of 
Peter's * primacy * among the other apostles. 

^ ap. Cypr. Ep, Ixxv. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


view which excludes it ; {b) it does not appear to be the 
obvious meaning of our Lord's words at first, and is 
rendered still more improbable by His later language ; 
{c) it is excluded by St. Paul's language about his own 
authority, discountenanced by the general language of 
other New Testament writers, while it cannot even plead 
anything in the New Testament, outside the Gospels, in 
its support. 

It is undoubtedly true that the papacy has possessed 
itself of the promise of our Lord to St. Peter in popular 
imagination, just in the same way as Protestantism of 
an un-catholic sort has possessed itself of certain 
portions of St. PauPs epistles about justification by faith, 
and the superiority of the spirit to the letter. Thus 
there are a number of texts about which we start 
with a kind of 'false conscience,' which we have to 
deal with, not (as we are apt to do) by avoiding 
them, but by dealing with them with attention and 
prayer, in the light of the mind of the Church, of 
the general sense of Scripture, and of the reason 
which God has given us, and His Spirit enlightens 
till we are familiarized with their true meaning, and 
it has taken its proper place in the context of our 
catholic faith. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



It is important for us, at the present stage of our 
argument, to have before us a clear historical summary 
of the position occupied by the see of Rome in the suc- 
cessive ages of the Church, such a historical summary 
seeming an essential condition of any sound judgment 
as to what our relation towards the Roman Church 
ought to be. 

The earliest Father then who mentions the subject, 
St. Irenaeus, regards the Roman Church as having been 
founded concurrently and equally by St. Peter and 
St Paul. In fact, (as we find from St. Paul's Epistle to 
the Romans) there was a considerable body of Christians 
at the capital, before any Apostle had been amongst 
them,i but St. Paul was amongst them during his first 
and second captivities, and St. Peter was at Rome 
probably when he wrote his first Epistle — certainly 
before his martyr's death, which he shared there with 
St. Paul, perhaps in a.d. 67. 

The prominence in which the Christian Church of 

^ Rom. i. II, 12. St. Paul had not seen them, and he would 
not go where any other Apostle had been before him (xv. 20, 21). 
St. Peter must have come to Rome at any rate not much before 
the end of St. Paul's first captivity, in A.D. 63. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the capital of the world must have inevitably found her- 
self among other Churches, the glory which accrued to 
her from her apostolic and other martyrs,^ and not least, 
the early munificence of her almsgiving, gave the 
Roman Church a special position in Christendom from 
the earliest days. Attention has been called to the fact 
that when she writes the Epistle which bears St. Clem- 
ent's name in order to exhort a recalcitrant party in 
the Chiu-ch at Corinth to submission to their presbyters, 
she writes with a tone of considerable authority. ^ " If 
any disobey the words spoken of God through us, let 
them know that they will entangle themselves in trans- 
gression, but we shall be clear from this sin." " You 
will cause us joy and exultation if, obeying the things 
written by us through the Spirit, you cut out the lawless 
passion, etc." This tone of authority may be due to 
the prestige of the Church at Rome ; ^ but it seems 
more likely that, though the letter is ^Titten in the 
name of that Church, the authority is mainly St. Clem- 
ent's, and that he speaks with authority as one of the 
chief order — the apostolic order of bishops — writing to 
a Church in which as yet there were no officers higher 
than presbyters.* But in any case it is remarkable that 

1 "That happy Church" Tertullian calls her "for which the 
Apostles poured out with their blood their whole teaching " {de 
Praescr, 36.). 

2 c. 59. The epistle was written about A.D. 95. 

3 "St. Ignatius" says Mr. AUnatt "writes to the * presiding^ 
Church of Rome " : Yes, * presiding,* but where ? ** In the place 
of the region of the Romans," and there too "having the pre- 
sidency of love." 

* See this discussed The Church and the Ministry p. 324, cf. 
p. 329- 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


the Episcopate seems to have been less prominent in 
the Church at Rome than was the case in the East.^ 

It is towards the end of the second century, when the 
line of Roman bishops comes into clearer historical 
light, that we begin to discern dimly the first beginnings 
of their claim to be successors of St. Peter ; and it is in 
A.D. 196, in the person of Victor, that we have our first 
anticipation of the aggressive spirit which is to be a 
distinguishing characteristic of the see of Rome in 
later ages. Victor ventured in a domineering spirit to 
excommunicate the Asiatic Churches who held to their 
Johannine tradition and insisted on keeping Easter on 
the day of the Jewish passover, whatever day of the 
week that might be. This arbitrary act on Victor's part 
brought down upon him the * sharp rebukes ' ^ of a 
number of bishops, and amongst them of the great St. 
Irenaeus, who contended that variety in ecclesiastical 
custom had never hitherto been a bar to fellowship, 
because such * difference only serves to commend the 
unity of the faith.' Victor stood reproved His ex- 
communication failed. It was a mere * attempt ' — not 
in the sense that he did not actually issue the sentence, 
for Eusebius tells us that he did ; but simply because 
it was ignored, and the question of Easter observance 

* Thus Dr. Salmon Inirod. to N, T, p. 565 «. calls attention 
to the fact ** how all through the first two centuries the importance 
of the Bishop of Rome is merged in the importance of his Church." 
Cf. Lightfoot Clement p. 254 : * the later Roman theory supposes 
that the Church of Rome derives all its authority from the bishop 
of Rome, as the successor of St. Peter. History inverts this 
relation, and shows that the power of the bishop of Rome was 
built upon the power of the Church of Rome. " 

' See Eusebius Hist. Eccles, v. 24. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


remained an open one till the Council of Nicaea closed 
it. The attempt however is significant of a spirit 
already in its slight beginnings present in the Roman 
Church. And it is important to notice that Eusebius, 
the fourth century Church historian, sees in Victor's 
action nothing but a piece of undue intolerance. He 
acknowledges nothing * papal ' in the bishop of Rome. 

It would not appear that any kind of authority was 
attached to the Roman see during the early centuries 
even in the West, except such moral authority or prestige 
as must have belonged inevitably to so great an apo- 
stolic see. With reference for instance to the Church's 
function of bearing witness to the faith, the voice of the 
see of Rome is but one element in the consentient 
testimony.! But yet her position in this respect has 
one remarkable feature, due to her relations to the 
capital city of the world. Rome was the centre of the 
world's movements. Everybody came thither. She 
was the world's 'microcosm.' It followed necessarily 
that she stood, as regards her Church, in a unique free- 
dom of communication with the Churches of the rest 
of the world. Christians from all parts necessarily 
gravitated thither. The faith in Rome was not only 
preserved by the local Christians, but tested by constant 
comparison with the faith of those who like Hegesippus 
or Polycarp came from widely different quarters to 
the world's centre and testified to finding there the 
same faith as they had believed at home. Thus it 
was that the testimony of the Roman Church had a 
* microcosmic ' character ; and when Irenaeus wants to 
^ See Tertullian de Praescr, 36. St. Irenaeus iii. 3. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


select a typical Western^ Church in order to enumerate 
the succession of her bishops and 'confound' the 
Gnostics with her creed, he chooses as a specimen, 
because " it would be tedious to enumerate the succes- 
sions of all the Churches," the Church of Rome : " for 
to this Church on account of her superior preeminence, 
it must need be that all Churches come together, that 
is^ the faithful from all sides ; and in this Church the 
tradition from the Apostles has been always preserved 
[not as elsewhere by a merely local body but] by men 
from ail parts. ^* 

At an unknown moment, before the middle of the 
third century, the Church of Rome, which up to that 
time had been Greek in language — alike in her liturgy 
and her theology — a Greek colony in the Latin city, 
became perhaps somewhat suddenly a Latin Church, 
and in consequence of this change of language, so com- 
pletely forgot her Greek past that in the fourth century 
she was ignorant of an incident in her Hfe which the 
coincidences of modem discovery have laid open to our 
eyes. This incident we notice here only so far as it 
illustrates with remarkable vividness the position of the 

^ He balances Rome in the West with Smyrna in the East. 
This passage from Irenaeus (iii. 3.) has been the subject of much 
dispute. I believe that Dr. Langen has finally fixed its mean- 
ing {Gesch. der rom, Kirche i. 172 note). We may compare the 
language of the Synodicon of Constantinople, which attributes the 
primacy to the older Rome because formerly " affairs converged 
there and therefore all men came together there " (Milman Lot. 
Chr, ii. 127). No interpretation is tenable which does not give 
force to the remarkable words I have italicized. The popular 
Ultramontane interpretation is excluded by its violating the whole 
context : cf. Salmon Infallibility p. 377. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Roman Church in this, till recently, unknown epoch of 
the early third century. St. Hippolytus, the great 
theologian of the Church of Rome, "who perhaps" 
says Dr. Newman "has no rival (among ante-Nicene 
theologians) except his master St. Irenaeus," is in his 
Refutation of all Heresies now discerned denouncing 
his contemporary, Pope Callistus, with extraordinary 
violence, as a destroyer of the Church discipline and 
indeed (to quote Dr. Newman again) as ^ a heresiarch ex 
cathedra ' : and not only is this the case, but in some 
unexplained way he appears to have created a schism in 
the Roman Church and to have reckoned himself as 
the true bishop. The schism was abandoned before 
his death, and it matters not to us now who was in the 
right in the matter. But it is a luminous fact that a 
great theologian can call a bishop of Rome a heresiarch 
without seeing any more significance in the fact than 
he would see in the case of the bishop of any other 
see, and without his attitude towards him affecting 
the universal reverence in which his name was held, 
"which a breath of ecclesiastical censure has never 
even dimmed." This incident, which we cannot but 
reckon a fact of history, illustrates how little essentially 
ecumenical there was in the position of the Roman see 
at this date, and how utterly alien to the mind of the 
greatest Roman theologian of the third century was 
any sort of notion that could even remotely point to the 
doctrine of Papal infallibility.^ 

1 I may refer on this subject to the Diet Chr, Biogr, s.v. 
Hippolytus Romanus vol. iii. pp. 88-91, 96. Dr. Newman 
Tracts Theol, attd EccL p. 222 would apparently regard the 
passage in the Elenchus about Zephyrinus and Callistus as an 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Leaving for the next chapter the task of tracing the 
development of the papacy in Latin Christianity, we 
proceed now to notice that in the doctrinal and 
disciplinary system of the Eastern Church the position 
of the Roman see remained where it was in the concep- 
tion of Irenaeus. The pre-eminent position of the see 
is of course recognized, as when the Churchmen of the 
East complain to St. Dionysius of Rome of the suspi- 
cious teaching of St Dionysius of Alexandria, " because 
the first of bishops was the person to whom complaints 
against the second were most naturally carried,'' ^ but 
if either the universal pastorate of the bishop of Rome 
or, a fortiori^ his infallibility is put forward as having a 
claim to be part of the Church's catholic Christianity, 
such a claim can be shown to be untenable in the 
light of facts. 

Let us consider two or three of these facts. 

When in the extreme crisis of the conflict for the 
Nicene faith the Pope Liberius " subscribed to heretical 
depravity " (so St. Jerome speaks of his signing a com- 
promising creed), abandoned Athanasius and notified 
that he had separated him from his communion, St. 
Athanasius betrays no other feeling than that of sorrow 
at the fall of a good man and anxiety to palliate his 
weakness : " he speaks with a noble tenderness of 
the fall of both Liberius and Hosius " (of Cordova). 

interpolation. But this is most arbitrary. **I grant" he says 
" that that portion of the work which relates to the Holy Trinity 
as closely resembles the works of Hippolytus in style and in 
teaching, as the libellous matter which has got a place in it is 
incompatible with his reputation,^^ [The italics are mine.] 
^ Robertson's Church History, 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Now we contend that if anything in the world can be 
certain, it is certain that St. Athanasius, had he had any 
idea of the bishop of Rome being in a unique sense the 
guardian of the faith, much more any notion of his 
infallibility, must have adopted another tone in regard 
to his fall. He must have quivered at the awful shock 
of finding himself deserted by the * Holy Father ' on the 
central dogma of the faith. It must have been much 
more to him than his desertion by Hosius. There is no 
avoiding or palliating this conclusion. 

The impression made upon our minds by this 
incident is deepened by the evidence of the general 
Councils. The attempt to foist into the history of 
the Council of Nicaea any sign of a belief in the 
universal pastorate of the bishop of Rome is violent in 
the extreme.^ The fathers in their 6th Canon recog- 

* We cannot help quoting the following paragraph from the 
work of one of the most learned of English Roman Catholic 
historical writers — ^Allies' See of St. Peter {^, 155). ** In the year 
325, at the great Nicene Council ... it is stated * that the Roman 
Church always had the primacy.'" [This clause (a) originally 
meant the primacy in her own region {b) was a Roman interpola- 
tion in the acts of the Council, expressly disallowed by the East, 
and rejected even by respectable Roman authorities, such as 
Hefele]. " The bishop of Corduba, in Spain, apparently at once 
papal legate and imperial commissioner, and Vitus and Vincentius, 
legates of S. Sylvester, presided over the Council." [It seems 
impossible to ascertain exactly who did preside over the Council. 
Hosius may have done so, but that he was papal legate comes 
only on the authority of a confessedly romancing historian of no 
weight and of the later fifth century, Gelasius of Cyzicus, and that 
Vitus and Vincentius did so, is not hinted by any authority at 
all]. " And it was determined that all these things should be sent 
to Sylvester, bishop of Rome, for his confirmation, which only 
could make the Council ecumenical. " [This statement comes {see 
Hefele Conciliengeschichte i. 426) from Dionysius Exiguus, and 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


nized in Rome a quasi-patriarchal power in her own 
region like that which they acknowledged equally in 
Alexandria and Antioch. They recognized nothing 
more. And we must go further. The fourth ecumenical 
Council, at Chalcedon, a.d. 451, following on the lines 
of the second, makes a canonical statement (Can. xxviii.) 
about the authority of the see of Rome which shows 
their view of the matter with unmistakeable clearness : — 
" The fathers properly gave privileges to the throne 
of old Rome, because it was the imperial city, and the 
150 Bishops (at Constantinople), being moved with the 
same intention, gave equal privileges to the most holy 
throne of new Rome (/>. Constantinople), judging with 
reason that the city which was honoured with the 
sovereignty and senate and enjoyed equal privileges with 

represents nothing more than the " Roman view " at the beginning 
of the 6th century]. Thus to ignore all contemporary sources of 
information and to compile narratives from the fictions of late or 
romancing authors is the Ultramontane way of writing history. 
In the same spirit Mr. Rivington makes a reference to a passage 
in Sozomen p. 42. ** Inasmuch as the care of all belonged to him 
(i>. Julius, bishop of Rome,) on account of the rank of his see 
he restored to each (of the Oriental bishops who had been driven 
away with Athanasius) his Church." This is from Sozomen E, H, 
iii. 8. But the word translated * inasmuch * means more strictly 
*on the plea that.* It represents Julius* view of his authority, 
and Mr. Rivington curiously enough has not gone on to quote 
Sozomen*s account of how the orientals dealt with his claim to 
authority. **They wrote back a letter full of irony and not with- 
out stern threatening . . . they did not choose to take the second 
place . . . they complained of Julius having insulted their 
synod . . . they repudiated what had been done as unjust and 
contrary to the rule of the Church.'* Nor did Mr. Rivington 
mention that Sozomen*s account of Julius* claim, as tested by his 
own letters, is exaggerated. See Athanasius* Hist, Writings 
(Bright) Pref, p. xxvii. 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the elder imperial Rome, should also be magnified like 
her in ecclesiastical matters, being the second after her.'' 
So spake the fathers of Chalcedon in the teeth of 
the protest of the legates of Rome. Nothing can be 
more certain than that the bishops who enacted this 
canon did not regard the privileges of Rome as part of 
the divine and essential constitution of the Church or 
they could not have used the expression " the fathers 
gave " : nothing can be more plain than that the 
primacy of Rome is in their eyes a * primacy of 
honour.'^ Jealousy of the growing claims of Rome 
may have had something to do with the tone of the 
canon — with its silence about the spiritual dignity of the 
see of St. Peter ; but its language cannot do less than 
disprove the idea that the claims which Rome was even 
then beginning to make were regarded by the Eastern 
Church as part of the catholic faith. Further, this 
canon explains in what sense, and in what sense only, 
the Council, in the complimentary letter in which 
they endeavoured to persuade St Leo to accept their 
28th Canon, can address him as "ruling like a head 
over the members " in the Council, and " commissioned 
by Christ with the guardianship of the vine.''^ jt \^ 

^ See the expression * privileges of honour ' in the 3d Canon of 
Constantinople to which that of Chalcedon refers back its authority. 
On the whole subject Dr. Bright's admirable Notes on the Canons 
should be consulted. ** The Quinisext Council, 681, confirmed all 
the Chalcedon canons without exception." Salmon l.c, p. 417. 

2 In fact any committee might address its president as "ruling like 
a head over the members." The 33d Apostolic Canon is very much 
to the point : ** The bishops of each nation (race) ought to recognize 
the first amongst them and esteem him as a head, and do nothing 
over and above (their proper business) without his judgment. " 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


quite true that individual oriental bishops, especially 
appellants to Rome who wished to say what was 
pleasant, and men like St Cyril of Alexandria, whose 
fear of the rising claims of Constantinople united his 
interests with those of Rome, recognized from time to 
time in a higher sense the universal pastorate of the 
Roman bishop,^ but their expressions belong to in- 
dividuals only, under circumstances when interest put 
strong pressure on belief. There is nothing of the sort 
to be found in St. Basil's or St. Chrysostom's voluminous 
works, though this belief, had it existed in their minds, 
must have emerged: and more than this — oriental 
writers are much given to verbose compliments in 
addressing distinguished people. The language of 
rhetoric and compliment must always be interpreted 
by the severer style of a formal canon. 

Once again, whatever strong language may be quoted 
from a few later oriental writers on behalf of the Roman 
see, as from St. Theodore the Studite in the 8th cen- 
tury, nothing can override the evidence of the formal 
action of the 6th General Council in 680, when it con- 
demned Honorius the Pope among the Monothelite 
heretics. "With them we anathematize" says the 
Council "and cast out of the Holy Catholic Church, 
Honorius, who was pope of the elder Rome, because we 
found that he followed Sergius' opinion in all respects 

^ Though St. Cyril in the early years of his episcopate preferred 
remaining outside the communion of Rome to restoring St. 
Chrysostom'siiftame to the diptychs of the Alexandrian Church, 
and Theodoret in spite of his language in addressing Leo, which 
was referred to in the last chapter, signed with a voluntariness 
which he emphasized the 28th canon of Chalcedon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


and confirmed his impious dogmas." Roman Catholic 
writers may endeavour to justify the actual language of 
Honorius — they may protest that the contemporary pope 
never intended to assent to his condemnation except 
for negligence in opposing heresy^ — we are not concerned at 
present with these contentions^ — ^but no one can possibly, 
with any show of reason, contend that the insertion of 
the name of the pope in a list of formal heretics by an 
ecumenical Council, does not prove that the bishops 
who composed the Council had no, even rudimentary, 
idea of the papal infallibility. 

Here then we leave the matter. The only claim here 
made is to have demonstrated one fact — that the belief 
in the universal pastorate and the doctrinal infallibility 
of the pope can in no sense be described as part of the 
catholic faith ; it cannot by any stretch of terms be 
described as part of the creed of Christendom held 
ubique, semper^ ab omnibus. Therefore, on the prin- 
ciples laid down already, it cannot be part of the obliga- 
tory creed of Christendom at all. Short of this there is 
very little we should not be prepared either to grant, or at 
least to leave an open question. We are not disposed 
at all to question the unique position held in Western 
Christendom by the see of Rome. We are not disposed 
to minimize the magnificence of the vocation assigned 
to her, especially in view of the Church's need of cen- 
tralization in the days when the Western Empire was 
decaying or gone. We would fain not fall short of what 

^ See Willis' Pope Honorius andtheNcio Roman Dognia, Papal 
Infallibility inconsistent with the cotidemnation of a Pope for 
heresy, etc. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


is fitting in our veneration of the greatest of Christian 
patriarchates. But no such veneration can justify us in 
assenting to any claims she likes to make, or in shutting 
our eyes to the fact that the acceptance of these claims 
is only possible on the basis either of a * Manichean ' 
disbelief in the capacity of the human reason to estimate 
the plainest facts of history, or of a doctrine of develop- 
ment which would cut at the root of the patristic prin- 
ciple that in Christian doctrine " whatever is truly new " 
or really partial, " is certainly false." 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



No one can fairly contemplate the greatness of the 
papacy or consider how vast a position it occupies in 
the whole of history, without being satisfied that it is 
something greater than could ever have been created by 
the ambition or power of individual popes or by the evil 
forces of injustice and fraud. It is one of those great 
historic growths which indicate a divine purpose latent 
in the tendencies of things and the circumstances of 
the world. A Leo, a Gregory, a Hildebrand could no 
more have devised or invented the papacy, than a 
Caesar, a Constantine, or a Justinian could have elabor- 
ated the Roman Empire. It is a natural development 
of circumstances, and it is in the fashioning of circum- 
stances that we look for the hand of Providence. In 
the fourth and fifth centuries the fact that the Western 
mind was comparatively undisturbed by the oriental 
heresies in regard to the Person of Christ which occu- 
pied the great ecumenical councils, caused the Western 
Church, and the great see which was the acknowledged 
centre of the Western Church, to seem to the eyes of 
the distracted orientals as a perpetual harbour of quiet 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


refuge. Rome in her dignified repose was the recipient 
of appeal after appeal from the East Further, though 
the Roman Church was not a great theological centre, 
like Antioch or Alexandria, or like the African Church 
among Latin-speaking peoples, and later the Church of 
South Gaul, yet in proportion as she was lacking in 
theological power, she was endowed with a splendid 
capacity for "holding the tradition" with unswerving 
orthodoxy. Individual Popes did indeed fail, and at 
important crises, like Liberius and Honorius, but on 
the whole the orthodoxy of the see of Rome was con- 
spicuous through all the controversies on the Trinity 
and the Incarnation. The consequent enhancement of 
her general ecclesiastical reputation coincided with the 
deeper sense of the need of a recognized centre to 
Western Christendom which finds expression in the 
canon of Sardica. And while the Roman see was thus 
having greatness thrust upon her from the circumstances 
of the Church's position, the tendency of events in the 
secular world was running steadily in the direction of 
her exaltation. The decay of the Western Empire and 
the removal of the seat of government from Rome, left 
the magnificent traditions of authority and the splendid 
prestige of the eternal city to add lustre to the chair of 
St Peter, whose occupants became constantly more 
important as paganism died away and each Western 
emperor was more contemptible than the last Once 
again the age which saw the crumbling of the old 
civilization of the Empire and the surging in of the 
great sea of fresh and vigorous barbarian life, in wave 
after wave of invasion, cried out, in the interests of 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


society as much as of religion, for some centre of moral 
and social authority ; and men's eyes had long grown 
accustomed to look upon Rome as the centre of the 
social system. 

" Now " says Dean Milman, speaking of the age of 
Gregory the Great — " Now was the crisis in which the 
Papacy must re-awaken its obscured and suspended 
life. It was the only power which lay not entirely and 
absolutely prostrate before the disasters of the times — 
a power which had an inherent strength, and might 
resume its majesty. It was this power which was most 
imperatively required to preserve all which was to 
survive out of the crumbling wreck of Roman civiliza- 
tion. To Western Christianity was absolutely necessary 
a centre, standing alone, strong in traditionary reverence, 
and in acknowledged claims to supremacy. Even the 
perfect organization of the Christian hierarchy might in 
all human probability have fallen to pieces in perpetual 
conflict : it might have degenerated into a half secular 
feudal caste with hereditary benefices, more and more 
entirely subservient to the civil authority, a priesthood 
of each nation or each tribe, gradually sinking to the 
intellectual or religious level of the nation or tribe. 
On the rise of a power, both controlling and conserva- 
tive, hung, humanly speaking, the life and death of 
Christianity — of Christianity as a permanent, aggressive, 
expansive, and to a certain extent uniform system. 
There must be a counterbalance to barbaric force, to 
the unavoidable anarchy of Teutonism, with its tribal, 
or at the utmost national independence, forming a 
host of small, conflicting, antagonistic kingdoms. . . . 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


It is impossible to conceive what had been the con- 
fusion, the lawlessness, the chaotic state of the middle 
ages, without the mediaeval Papacy ; and of the medi- 
aeval Papacy the real father is Gregory the Great." ^ 

There is, then, in the deepest sense of the words a 
providential purpose in the papacy, and it is impossible 
to estimate all that the Church as a whole owes to the 
great see of Rome. But of course we recognize a provi- 
dential purpose of a not dissimilar kind, and in relation 
to the spread of Christianity, in the growth of the 
Roman Empire and the diffusion of the Greek language. 
We recognize a divine vocation given to the Eastern 
Church as the great mother of theology, as least as 
conspicuous as that which was intrusted to the West in 
the sphere of discipline and government. But this 
recognition does not carry with it either of two im- 
portant consequences. It does not carry with it any 
recognition of a dogmatic authority given either to East 
or West in isolation, nor does it carry with it any impli- 
cation that the vocation we recognize is part of the 
Church's unalterable system. Any vocation which is 
rooted in the circumstances of a particular epoch may 
vanish with the circumstances which conditioned it. 
It does not follow because governmental authority or 
centralization was the one thing needed in the seventh 
century that it is the one thing needed now : what is 
the very symbol or instrument of unity in one age may 
be the source of schism in another, and the Divine Pro- 
vidence which gave its vocation first to Greek and then 

* Hist, of Latin Chr, b. iii. c. vii. vol. ii. pp. ICX>-I02, ed. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


to Latin Christianity may have as great a vocation in 
store (who can tell that it may not be so ?) for the 
English-speaking and Oriental Oiurches. At any rate 
we go no way towards recognizing whatever claims 
Rome may choose to make upon us, when we allow 
ourselves in unstinting admiration of the greatness of 
the work which God has allowed her to do ; for it is true 
of everything in Christianity, as in the world at large, 
— of everything which is not part and parcel of her 
catholic system doctrinal, moral, and sacramental — 

**The old order changeth, yielding place to new, 
And God fulfils Himself in many ways, 
Lest one good custom should corrupt the world." 

And when we come to look a little closer at the his- 
tory of the Roman Church it seems to us to have all the 
appearance, taking it in general, of a system, backed 
indeed by a divine intention, but perverted by some- 
thing which is much more satanic than divine. We 
know that St. Peter Damian called the great Hildebrand 
his " sanctus Satanas," and the expression, in whatever 
sense originally used, has a very striking application to 
the papacy as a whole. The certainly very undivine 
qualities of ambition, injustice, and dishonesty have 
been to a strange extent identified with the whole history 
of the papacy. These qualities are all the more con- 
spicuous when we see them in so real a saint as the man 
who has a claim to be called the father of the papacy, 
Leo the Great. Saint as he was, he was wonderfully 
unscrupulous in asserting the claims of his see, and 
strangely blinded in conscience to the authority of truth 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


when he quoted, as a canon of Nicsea, what had been 
shown to demonstration to be a canon of Sardica and 
not of Nicaea.^ Again, we may not be able to fix on 
any individuals the responsibility for such forgeries as 
the Donation of Constantine and the Isidorian Decretals, 
but it goes against our surest instincts to believe that a 
system, which was corresponding in its actual method of 
working to a divine purpose, could have been allowed 
to depend so largely upon forgeries for its substructure 
at critical epochs, as the Roman system has in fact 

Nay, even conscious fraud is a familiar element in 
official acts of the Roman see.^ And further, the 

1 Leo the Great (Fathers for English Readers) pp. 1 13- 115. 

* See e,g, WiUis* Pope Honorius p. 26 : ** The condemnation 
of Pope Honorius for heresy is recorded in the Roman Breviaries 
until the sixteenth century ; at which period the name of Honorius 
suddenly disappears. The theory of Papal Infallibility was at 
that time being rapidly developed. A fact opposed it. The 
evidence for the fact is suppressed. * I have before me * writes 
P^re Gratry *a Roman Breviary of 1520, printed at Turin, in 
which, on the feast of S. Leo, June 28th, I find the condemnation 
of Honorius : In which synod were condemned Sergius, Cyrus, 
Honorius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter .... who asserted and pro- 
claimed one will and operation in our Lord Jesus Christ. 

** *I open the Roman Breviary of to-day,* he continues, *and there 
I find in the instruction of S. Leo (June 28th) : In this Council 
were condemned Cyrus, Sergius and Pyrrhus, who preached only 
one will and operation in Christ. The trifling incident of a Pope 
condemned for heresy by an Ecumenical Council is. simply 
omitted by the revisers of the Breviary in the sixteenth century. 
Father Gamier, in his edition of the Liber Diumus, says, with a 
gentle irony, that they omitted it for the sake of brevity.' " 

See also his quotation of Father Gratry 's letter, p. 28. ** Has 
God, then, need of your falsehoods, that you speak deceitfiilly for 
Him? *Numquid indiget Deus mendacio vestro, ut pro eo 
loquamini dolos ? ' This mode of apologetics without openness is 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


love of interpolations and falsifications is alive still 
among Roman controversialists. The interpolations in 
St. Cyprian are still printed as an integral part of the 
text by Father Hurter ^ and quoted by Allnatt ^ ; and 
perhaps there is nothing which gives to the minds of 
intelligent and truth-loving men so invincible a pre 
judice against the Ultramontane system and temper — 
nothing which so radically convinces them that it is not 
divine — as the certainty that Ultramontane writers will 

one of the causes of our religious decay for centuries past. As 
soon as human nature perceives in the apostle the smallest trace 
of craft or duplicity, it turns aside and takes to flight ; the best 
always flee farther than the rest. Their souls do not listen to the 
voice of liars : * Oves non audiunt vocem alienorum. * What then, 
are we — we catholic priests, ministers of Jesus Christ and of His 
Gospel, and servants of His Church? Are we the preachers of 
falsehood or the apostles of truth? Is not every truth, every true 
gift, every historical and real fact for us, just as every falsehood is 
against us ? Has not the time arrived — in this age of publicity, in 
which everything is seen and brought to light, in which everything 
that before was spoken in the ear, is now preached upon the 
housetops — has not the time arrived, I repeat, to reject with dis- 
gust the frauds, the interpolations, and mutilations which liars 
and forgers, our most cruel enemies, have been able to introduce 
amongst us ... I myself was long before I could believe in this 
apologetic of ignorance, blindness, and half-honesty, or rather dis- 
honesty, which desires the end, which believes in the goodness of 
its aim and its truths ; but which, to attain this end, has recourse 
to deceit, to mystery, to force, to falsehood, to a fraudulent inven- 
tion of forged passages. Once more. Has God need of these 
frauds? . . . O ye men of little faith, of low minds, of miserable 
hearts, have not your cunning devices become the scandal of 

^ Sanctorum Patrum Opuscula Selecta vol. i. 

^ Cathedra Petri pp. 40-41. He defends the interpolations by 
the analogy of the text of *the heavenly witness* (i St. John 
V. 7, 8) ; as if we would quote that in defence of Trinitarian 
doctrine ! 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


always be found manipulating facts and making out a 
case, will never behave as men who are loyally endea- 
vouring to seek the light and present facts as they are. 

If the actual history of the papacy prevents us from 
regarding it as a growth in accordance with the will of 
God, at least as forcibly does it prevent us from con- 
sidering the claim it has recently made, to be part of 
the Christian Revelation, or — what the Vatican Council 
declared it to be — a * dogma divinitus revelatum/ It is 
indeed to * triumph over history ' for the Pope to assert 
that in decreeing his infallibility he is "faithfully 
adhering to the tradition received from the first begin- 
nings of the Christian faith." The doctrine of the 
Papacy is so manifestly a gradual growth by accretion 
that no one can possibly, with his eyes upon the facts 
of history, regard it as part of the faith * once for all 
delivered.' That the evidence of the Eastern Church 
will not permit of our accepting as catholic any of the 
later papal claims has been already shown. It remains 
to show that in the West also the papal doctrine is of 
the nature of an occasional growth. 

In the fourth century, the Western Church at the 
Council of Sardica allowed an appeal on the part of 
condemned bishops to Julius of Rome. Their third 
canon runs as follows : " The bishop Hosius said .... 
If any bishop in any matter seems to have been con- 
demned [unjustly] and supposes himself to be not 
unsound, but that his case is good for a renewal of the 
trial : if it please your charity, let us honour the memory 
of the apostle Peter, and [direct] a letter to be written 
by the bishops who have tried the case to Julius bishop 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


of Rome, so that the case should be heard again if it be 
necessary, by the bishops near the province in question, 
and that he may himself appoint the judges." Here 
and in the two following canons which form the basis of 
the appellate jurisdiction of Rome, the bishops of the 
West appear not as recognizing an existing or essential 
right, but as conferring a privilege, in view of certain 
experienced needs — ^just as the bishops in a Pan- Anglican 
Conference might find it necessary to institute a right 
of appeal to Canterbury in honour of the memory of 
Augustin. When in the case of the African presbyter 
Apiarius, the Roman bishops quoted these canons of 
Sardica, as canons of Nicsea, and used them to justify 
interference with the ordinary jurisdiction of an African 
bishop over his presbyter, the Church of Africa first 
ascertained by consulting the oriental authorities that 
these canons were not Nicene, and proceeded in counciP 
to guard jealously the rights of their own Church and 
to repudiate the papal interference : " We find it enacted 
in no council of the fathers that any persons may be 
sent as legates of your holiness Do not there- 
fore, at the request of any, send your clergy as agents 
for you, lest we seem to introduce into the Church of 
Christ the ambitious pride of the world." 

The Papal authority is thus, at its root, a growth of 
circumstances, not a part of a revelation. So again 
if we examine the language of the theologian of the 
fourth century who is sometimes quoted as an extreme 
partisan of the just-developing papal claim — St. Jerome, 
it will be very evident that what he recognised in 
lA.D. 425. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Rome is recognised rather in the way of personal 
predilection than of ecclesiastical doctrine. When he 
is bewildered amid the confusion of theological dis- 
putes in the East, he throws himself upon the authority 
of the Roman bishop, as he sits aloof in the calm 
security of the West "Decree" he says to Pope 
Damasus " decree, and I will not fear to speak of three 
hypostases (in God) " : " whoso gathereth not with thee, 
scattereth " ; " whoso eats the lamb outside this house 
(i.e, the see of Peter) is profane " : " he who is joined to 
the see of Peter is mine." This language seems clear 
enough, but when St Jerome apparently later in life,^ 
after he had abandoned Rome in disgust, was pressed 
with the authority of the Roman see, he can use exactly 
the opposite tone. *What' he asks in effect *is the 
authority of the see of Rome but the authority of a 
single bishop ? ' "If it is a question of authority, the 
world is greater than the city. Wherever there is a 
bishop, at Rome, or at Eugubium, or at Constantinople, 
or at Rhegium, or at Alexandria, or at Tanis, he has the 
same worth (meritum), the same priesthood. The power 
of wealth or the humility of poverty do not make a 
bishop higher or lower. They are all successors of the 
Apostles." 2 This passage is not quoted by Roman 

^ I have given reasons for dating this letter in the later part of 
his life in Church and Ministry p. 172 n.^ 

2 Ep. cxlvi. The context of these words may be explained 
thus. St Jerome after a certain period in his life is zealous in 
maintaining the dignity of the priesthood of the presbyter, as 
against the arrogance of bishops and, on the other hand, the self- 
assertion of deacons. Thus in this epistle he is maintaining in 
effect that bishops are substantially of the same order as presbyters, 
only differing in the power of ordination. But the * custom of the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


controversialists, for a very plain reason: because it 
indicates that the authority of the Roman see rested for 
Jerome on what is variable in a theologian^-on sen- 
timent, on expedience, on feeling — not on what is 
invariable, the basis of doctrinal authority. 

Once again, the theory of the see of Peter held by the 
African theologians of the third and fourth centuries, 
while it makes the Roman see amongst other Churches 
the symbol and normal centre of unity, as Peter was 
amongst the Apostles, does not involve any distinctive 
authority in the Roman bishop. The see of Peter is the 
symbol of that episcopacy in which all bishops equally 
share, which inheres in its entirety in each episcopate, 
and renders each bishop fundamentally independent 
and responsible for his actions to none but God.^ This 

Roman Church ' is pleaded against Jerome. At Rome the bishop 
on the one hand occupied a unique position, and the deacons, on 
the other, who were only seven in number, occupied a more dis- 
tinguished position than the presbyters of whom there was a 
* crowd. * Jerome treats this plea with great contempt. ** If it is a 
question of authority the world is greater than the city." A bishop 
is everywhere substantially the same. As for the deacons ** Why 
do you produce against me the custom of one city ? . . . Every- 
thing is more desired where it is rare. Among the Indians flea- 
wort is more precious than pepper." 

^ ** There is" cries Cyprian **one God, and one Christ, and one 
Church, and one see founded on Peter by the voice of the Lord " 
{^Ep. xliii.), but he is asserting not the claims of the see of Rome, but 
of his own see of Carthage. The see of Peter is equivalent to the 
episcopate. Fuller references on St. Cyprian's theory of the epi- 
scopate will be found in The Church and the Ministry p. 165 f. 
But I may refer here to the expression in De Unitate 51" the 
episcopate (in the Church) is one, and is shared by each bishop in 
such a way that he is responsible for the whole" (or **that the 
whole is held by each " — a singulis in solidum pars tenetur). On 
this basis the independence of each bishop is frequently stated. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


is the theory as St. Cyprian states it. He regarded the 
see of Rome (as being in a special sense the see of 
Peter) as the normal centre of unity, but not as the 
centre of unity in any such sense as would enable it to 
impose conditions of communion which interfered with 
the catholic liberty of other Churches. This however 

" Each bishop exercises in the administration of his Church the 
free choice of his own will, having to give account of his action to 
the Lord " {,Ep, Ixii. 3). The see of Rome is described {Ep, lix. 
14) as **the see of Peter, the principal Church, whence sacerdotal 
unity had its origin," but these last words can only mean that 
Peter's episcopate was the first given. In the very context of this 
expression he goes on to reassert the independence of each episco- 
pate. His language (and Firmilian's) in face of Stephen's claim 
to the contrary is quoted in the next chapter. 

I think it is in place to notice here the evidence of a tract ** on 
dice-players " {de Aleatoribus) commonly printed with Cyprian's 
works. It is plainly written by a bishop, and as he speaks of the 
divine goodness having bestowed upon him the " leadership of the 
apostolate," "the vicariate of the Lord," "the original authori- 
tative apostolate on which Christ founded his Church" (c. I, apo- 
stolatus ducatus, vicaria Domini sedes, origo authentici apostolatus) 
he has been generally supposed, as by Bellarmin and others, to have 
been bishop of Rome. Its most recent editor in Germany, Prof. 
Harnack, holds to this opinion and attributes the tract to Victor, 
c. A.D. 195 {Texte und Untersuchungen v. i), but he points out 
that the titles mentioned above are titles not of the papacy but of 
the episcopate. The *we' of c. i is explained in c. 2 as **we, 
that is we bishops, shepherds of the sheep" "since we bishops 
have by the laying on of hands received the same Holy Ghost (as 
came upon the Apostles) within the shelter of our breast." 
Thus "the leadership which belongs to the apostolate" "the 
vicariate of the Lord" "the original authoritative apostolate" 
are titles of the episcopate as such. Indeed that every bishop 
represents Christ is a commonplace of the theology of Ignatius 
and of early Church writers in general, and it does not seem 
to me that there are strong reasons for attributing this tract to 
a bishop of Rome. It is more likely to be by an early African 


Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


was exactly what Stephen of Rome endeavoured to do. 
He went so far as to excommunicate St. Cyprian and 
the African and Oriental Churches which agreed with 
him, for refusing to recognize the vaHdity of heretical 
baptism — a matter on which there had been no ecu- 
menical decision, — and no language can be more 
forcible than that in which both Cyprian and Firmilian 
assert their own episcopal independence against what 
they regarded as the arrogant claim of St. Stephen. 
Thus St. Cyprian's own attitude towards St. Stephen 
interprets his language about the Roman see with a vivid 
clearness. Nor did St. Augustin in later days see in 
Cyprian's conduct in this matter anything but what 
deserved the highest commendation.^ If Optatus, who 
was earlier than Augustin, seems to attribute to the see 
of Peter at Rome more actual authority as the centre of 
unity, it must be remembered that he too uses * the see 
of Peter ' in an ideal sense as identical with the episco- 
pate, and if he is emphatic on the necessity of union 
with the see of Peter he is as emphatic on the necessity 
of union with the Asiatic Churches, to whom St. John 
wrote.2 Both the see of Rome and the Churches of 
Asia are in different senses the symbols of catholic unity. 

^ He modifies indeed St. Cyprian's language about the indepen- 
dence of the individual bishop. But the authority which he 
recognizes as limiting the freedom of the individual bishop is that 
of the General Council. 

2** Outside the seven Churches," he says, speaking of the 
Asiatic Churches with whom he and the Catholics are in com- 
munion, ** whatever is without, is alien" {De Schism, Donat. 
ii. 6, again vi. 3). No one can read the Epistles to the Gala- 
tians or Corinthians who is not in communion with those 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Thus if we examine the history of the Western Church, 
we do indeed find a high position assigned from very 
early days to the see of Rome, considered as in a special 
sense the see of St. Peter. But we do not find anything 
which justifies its later claims, still less anything which 
justifies these claims being regarded as part of the 
catholic heritage of the Church. No doubt after the 
fifth century the history of the Western Church is mainly 
the history of the exaltation of the papacy. Isidore of 
Seville ^ no longer interprets the injunction to St. Peter 
" feed my lambs," as the typical pastoral charge to feed 
the little ones of Christ's flock. The * lambs ' are now 
the bishops of the churches of the world whose govern- 
ment is by a special charge committed to Peter and his 
representatives. Nevertheless the growth of the claim of 
Rome and of its acceptance was slow, gradual, and inter- 
mittent. St. Gregory the Great can repudiate as pregnant 
with Satanic arrogance the title of " universal bishop " 
which afterwards appears in the forged decretals as 
a papal title and which so clearly describes the papal 
claim. The popes of the seventh century acquiesce ^ 
in pope Honorius' letter being subjected to the judg- 
ment of a general Council, and submit to, and accept, 
his condemnation. For many centuries each pope on 
his accession condemned among formal heretics one of 
his infallible predecessors. The papal claim, which 
grew always with the growth of actual power, reached its 
extreme point as far as the claim of authority is con- 
cerned in the Bull Unam Sanctam of Boniface viii., 

* Ep, viii. c. A.D. 620. 

2 See Willis* Pope Honorius etc. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


A.D. 1302.1 The authority here claimed is absolute 
and universal in the secular and spiritual spheres 
alike. The doctrine of infallibility came to the fore 
when the logic of events had demonstrated the un- 
tenability of the theocratic claim over the world. But 
the doctrine was the opinion of a school only, not a 
dogma. It was repudiated with the most genuine 
earnestness and without reproof up to a recent date, as 
for example in a document as common as Keenan's 
Controversial Catechism it was declared to be " no article 
of Catholic belief." 2 Thus nothing can be more 

^ Quoted in Gieseler {EccL Hist, iii. 146) who throughout sum- 
marizes clearly the stages in the growth of the papal claim. I 
suppose that the attitude of practical devotion towards the vicar 
of Christ encouraged among Roman Catholics exceeds the bounds 
even of the theory. Cardinal Patrizi in a document " addressed " 
(as is remarked in the Dublin Review April 1865 p. 440) " to the 
Catholics of Pius ix.'s own diocese, by his express sanction and 
under his very eye," claims for the Encyclical of that Pontiff and, 
consequently, for every like expression of the Pope's mind, 
to be the very word of God^ to be received on pain of forfeiting 

*^ Keenan's Controversial Catechism or Protestantism Refuted and 
Catholicism Established Ed. 1846, with the imprimatur of the 
Vicars-apostolic for Scotland. P. \\*] of the Powers of a General 
Council i etc.: ** Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to 
be infallible ? " * * This is a Protestant invention ; it is no article 
of the Catholic faith ; no decision of his can oblige under pain of 
heresy, unless it be received and enforced by the teaching body — 
that is by the bishops of the Church." [In later editions this sec- 
tion is omitted.] The Constitution Pastor aetemus declares on 
the other hand that **it is a dogma divinely revealed that the 
Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra ... is possessed of 
that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that His 
Church should be provided for defining doctrine regarding faith or 
morals : and that therefore such definitions of the Roman Pontiff 
are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Utterly contrary to fact than the declaration of Pope 
Pius IX. that in declaring the Papal Infallibility a 
" dogma divinely revealed " he was " faithfully adhering 
to the tradition received from the first beginnings 
of the Christian faith." 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



If it be granted that enough account has already 
been given of what constitutes the Church's unity of 
Life, and of what is necessary for her unity in the 
Truth, yet there still remains to be dealt with, that 
third sort of unity whch was referred to at starting as 
characterizing the Church. This is the unity of Love, 
or outward fellowship, 'the bond of peace,' which it is 
so fully our duty to preserve that wilful schism would 
at least annul all the saving effects of being constitu- 
tionally within the limits of church unity. That is to 
say — schism does not merely mean breaking away from 
the episcopal form of government. The schisms of the 
early Church were episcopal in form, but none the less 
they were understood to put their responsible members 
outside the Church's saving unity. ^ 

What then constitutes the guilt of schism? Not 
merely being separated, for the separated party may not 
be the guilty party, as, for example, in the case when 
Diotrephes * excommunicated ' the brethren who came 
from St. John,2 or Pope Victor the Asiatic Churches, or 

^ St. Cyprian * On Unity ' was written against episcopal 
schismatics* * 2 St. John 9, 10. 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Pope Stephen St. Cyprian and the African Churches. 
None of these excommunicated parties were under- 
stood to be schismatics. Schism, considered apart from 
heresy, as a sin excluding from the benefits of church 
life, means wilful self-withdrawal from the legitimate 
succession of the catholic Church on the part of an 
individual or party, or, in a secondary sense, the wilful 
causing of a breach inside the Church. 

Schism is a state of things which results generally 
from one of two tempers of mind. It may be the result 
of the pride which will not brook ecclesiastical sub- 
ordination, which makes men stand upon their dignity, 
and resent some supposed slight or injury because they 
value their own self-esteem above the Church's fellow- 
ship. It was this sort of self-assertion and the personal 
animosity which springs from it, which produced the 
schism of Felicissimus at Carthage against St. Cyprian, 
and it has played a large part in the history of modern 
divisions. It is easily understood that schism so bred, 
should generally involve heresy, for the self-will which 
isolates itself to avoid unpleasant subordination is not 
likely to miss the temper of self-opinionatedness in 
matters of faith, and we understand St. Jerome's words — 
" no schism fails to devise a heresy for itself to justify 
its withdrawal." 

But schism may have what we must call a nobler 
root. It may spring from impatient, undisciplined zeal 
against evil in the Church. The zealous reformer 
smarts with indignation against the abuses and undisci- 
pline which deface the Body of Christ. He and his 
followers are afraid to contaminate themselves by con- 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


nivance with that which they cannot quickly alter. 
Their zeal is too much for their reverence for Christ's 
plan, for their subordination, for their patience. They 
take the matter of God's Church into their own hands. 
They deal with it, with more or less of recklessness, 
in their own way. The temper of reverent caution 
which fears to dispense with, or lay hands upon, out- 
ward forms, whether of divine appointment or reverend 
antiquity, because for the moment their practical value 
is obscured — this is forgotten or discarded by the men 
of intemperate, impatient zeal; and thus they form a 
Church of their own with a righteousness of their own, 
and a constitution of their own choosing. This is the 
second source of schism in the Church. If we con- 
sider the causes of the great presbyterian schisms of 
the Reformation, how undisciplined, how unguarded 
do we find to have been the zeal of their main authors ! 
Or to go further back, what else was the root of the 
disciplinary schisms in the early Church — of Mon- 
tanism, of the schism which Novatian created at 
Rome, of the schism of the Donatists, of the schism 
of Lucifer, of the schism at Antioch against St. 
Meletius? Can we not directly trace TertuUian's de- 
velopment among the Montanists into a schismatical 
attitude towards the Church to that tone of intellectual 
and moral impatience which characterized his whole 
mind, and which he himself deplores when he writes 
On Patience^ "as an invalid who, since he is without 
health, knows not how to be silent about its blessings," 
" as one ever sick with the heats of impatience must of 
necessity sigh after and invoke and persistently plead 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


for that health of patience which he possesses not." 
This impatience which TertuUian deplores in himself 
was the animating spirit in the whole body of disciplin- 
ary schismatics. 

But from whatever cause it may spring, schism — 
episcopal or not — is unequivocally condemned by the 
fathers. " It were better to endure anything/ said St. 
Dionysius of Alexandria to Novatian, " than to break up 
the Church of Christ ; martyrdom to avoid division were 
no less glorious than martyrdom to avoid idolatry ; nay, 
in my judgment were more glorious." "The sin of 
schism," says St. Cyprian, "seems to be worse than 
failing to confess Christ in persecutions." "There is 
nothing more serious than the sacrilege of schism," says 
St. Augustin. "No such reformation," says Irenaeus, 
" can be effected by them, as will compensate for the 
mischief arising from their schism." " It is no less an 
evil than heresy," says St. Chrysostom. 

On one or two of the ancient schisms it is necessary 
to say something more in detail. First, on Donatism : 
because (since the days of Dr. Newman's * Apologia ' at 
any rate) it has been the fashion to compare the con- 
dition of the Church of England with that of the Dona- 
tists. Let us make an imaginary story of events in 
England which would bring the facts of the English 
Church in the sixteenth century into exact analogy to 
those of Africa in the fourth, and the imaginary case 
will show us both what sort of conduct would have 
really constituted an English protestant episcopal schism, 
and also how far in fact the English Church is from being 
implicated in anything of the sort. Suppose that a body 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


of zealous reformers in the reign of Mary, despairing of 
the Church of England, had, on the election of ah arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, raised frivolous objections against 
him, consecrated a rival prelate first to that see, and 
then in a number of other places ; established a separate 
Church in England, and gathered large numbers of 
adherents ; declared itself not only the only Church of 
England, but the only Church of the world, the catholic 
Church having ceased to exist through the contamina- 
tion of evil ; suppose, we say, such a course of action 
had been pursued, and that the schismatical Church had 
succeeded in gaining the majority in England for a while 
and subsisting side by side with the cathoUc succession, 
baptizing, as persons not yet Christian, those who came 
over to them from the catholic Church ; then you would 
have had a parallel to the Donatist schism. Be it ever 
remembered that the Donatist body in Africa was riot 
constituted by a reform of a national Church, but was 
as distinct a schism from the Church of their own dis- 
trict, as ever took place : and that the Donatist body 
held itself the only true Church of the world, — in both 
points differing toto caelo from the position of the Angli- 
can communion. 

We have avoided entering into the details of the 
Donatist history to save space, but of the details of 
the schism at Antioch something must be said as 
it illustrates an important principle — that there can 
be schism in the Church as well as a schism from 
the Church — a schism in the Church, leaving both 
separated parties within the communion of the Church 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


The schism at Antioch, then, dates from the with- 
drawal of an orthodox party in the fourth century from 
the ministrations of a Arian prelate. This withdrawal 
met with the approval of St. Athanasius and his friends ; 
but the public profession of orthodoxy by the bishop, 
Meletius, who had been elected under Arian auspices, 
gave the separated body an opportunity to return into 
commimion with him. All seemed in train for a restora- 
tion of unity when the intemperate and hasty action of 
Lucifer — a firebrand among prelates, who afterwards 
organized a schism of his own — perpetuated the breach, 
by giving the orthodox party a separate bishop, Paulinus. 
There was a great deal of the schismatical spirit of 
impatient zeal in that action which left the Antiochene 
Church with rival prelates and rival bodies of adherents, 
but the most strenuously orthodox party in the Church 
at large could not bring themselves to disown Paulinus. 
He was accepted by Rome, by Alexandria, by the West, 
while the East generally held to St. Meletius. Remain- 
ing thus unrecognized by Rome St. Meletius notwith- 
standing presided till his death at the second Council 
accepted as ecumenical in the Church, and has been 
acknowledged since his death as a saint both in East 
and West. We may then quote as appropriate to the 
case of St. Meletius a remark of the Roman Catholic 
historian Tillemont with reference to some later Eastern 
saints of the period of the Monophysite schism who 
lived and died out of the communion of Rome because 
they remained in communion with Constantinople : 
"As Elias and Flavian had always remained in com- 
munion with Acacius by the fact of their continuing in 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


communion with Constantinople, the Pope Hormisdas 
[at the restoration of unity] did his best to secure their ex- 
clusion from the diptychs of their Churches. But their 
people preferred to submit to the extremest measures 
rather than do this injury to the memory of those who had 
been their glory while they lived. So much so that the 
Roman Church was obliged to do some violence to her 
own maxims: she seems in fact to have at last abandoned 
them by honouring, as her protectors in heaven, those 
whom she would not admit to her communion on 
earth." ^ The Antiochene schism is, therefore, significant 
as illustrating some facts of importance : that there may 
be a schism with faults on both sides, even in a local 
Church, when neither side is finally regarded as out of 
the communion of the Church at large : that there are 
circumstances when even a somewhat schismatical act 
like that of Lucifer may be condoned : that breaches of 
fellowship in the Church do not necessarily always 
involve breaches of communion with the Church, 
Nothing in fact can be called schism in the full sense 
of the word except conscious self-withdrawal from that 
part of Christ's visible and orthodox Church to which 
one belongs, and to neither of the Antiochene parties 
is this act attributable. In this local separation then 
we mark the distinction between breaches in the Church 
and separation y9Y?w the Church. 

It is very possible to construct an imaginary parallel 

^ Mem, EccL xvi. 708. I think it is not without importance to 
notice that the language of the Roman liturgy still involves the 
idea that the Church is divided and requires corporate reunion : 
she prays our Lord * to bring her into peace and unity (pacificare 
et coadunare) according to His will.* 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


in Reformation history to the case at Antioch. Suppos- 
ing the English bishops in EHzabeth's reign had become 
heretical, and an orthodox party retaining communion 
with the West had withdrawn from their communion : 
supposing the Anglican bishops, say in James i.'s reign, 
had returned to orthodoxy, while almost simultaneously 
a rival succession of bishops was established over the 
separate body — in such rival successions you would 
have a parallel to the state of things at Antioch. It 
is hardly necessary to remark that this parallel is 
imaginary, because the state of things was not as we 
have supposed. But such a schism might have left 
both parties with a fair claim to represent the Church 
catholic in England. 

We have established hitherto two principles: — that 
there is such a sin as schism which in and by itself is 
sufficient to unchurch a community; and, secondly, 
that short of this, there is such a thing as a breach of 
communion in the Church, which is due to the *old 
leaven ' working in her — the temper of schism militating 
against the temper of love. A little consideration and 
reading will show that the separation of East and 
West and the separation of England and Rome ^ were 
not due to conduct which constitutes schism in the 
primary sense of the term — not, that is, to self- withdrawal 
from the Church cathoUc; but that they were due to 
that temper of schism which is always at work and, like 

^ I shall return to this subject again, but it may be needful, 
even now, to recall to the reader's mind the fact that the English 
Church has never excommunicated the Roman Church, but the 
Roman Church her. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


sin in any shape, mars the manifestation of God in the 
Church at large. 

In the party spirit in the Church of Corinth St. Paul 
sees the schismatical temper. In Victor's conduct 
when he excommunicated the Asiatic Church for not 
keeping Easter after the common fashion, Irenaeus 
would lead us to see the same temper, which is ready to 
violate the unity of love for something which falls short 
of the necessities of the faith. ^ Once again when 
Pope Stephen endeavoured to excommunicate Churches 
which held the invalidity of heretical baptism (an 
opinion which no general church voice had yet con- 
demned), he was anticipating the due action of church 
authority in the interests of his own see and in the temper 
of impatience to deal with what he thought disastrous. 
Pride in the cause of a man's own see, intolerance, 
impatience, these are notes of the schismatical temper. 
This is what was plain to St. Cyprian and St. Fir- 
milian, the most conspicuous amongst the bishops 
attacked. They accuse St. Stephen of intolerable 
arrogance in interfering with the liberty of other 
episcopal sees. St. Firmilian says very boldly that 
the Pope * is the true schismatic,' and has * cut off' from 
communion none other than * himself ^ — meaning that 
the temper of schism, and, therefore, the guilt of schism 
lies not with those who are unjusdy excluded, whether 
by * Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence, 
and casteth the brethren out of the Church,' or by any 
other bishop, but with him who does the unjust act in 
the interests of ambition or impatience. And we should 

^ Euseb. H. E. v. 24. * Cypr. Epp, Ixxii. -Ixxiv. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


notice St. Augustin's verdict upon St. Cyprian in this 
matter, where he so strongly asserted the independent 
rights of his see. He praises him (to the Donatists) as 
the very type of the unschismatic temper. Why? 
Because, unlike the Donatists, even in a matter of 
such great importance as the validity of heretical 
baptism, he did not press the opinion which the African 
Church then legitimately held (for it was still an open 
question) ; he did not go beyond the limits of ecumenical 
authority ; he did not excommunicate those who held 
the validity of heretical baptism, but bore with them in 
a matter where the universal Church's voice was not 
distinct. " Cyprian and those with him walking in most 
persistent tolerance, remained in unity with those who 
taught differently from them." " Though they held that 
heretics and schismatics did not possess baptism, yet 
they chose rather to have communion with them when 
they had been received into the Church without 
baptism . . . than to be separated from unity ; accord- 
ing to the words of Cyprian — * Judging no one and 
depriving no one of the right of communion if he differ 
from us.' . . . Behold, I see thus in unity Cyprian and 
others his colleagues, who on holding a council decided 
against the validity of baptism given outside the Church. 
But again, behold, I see in the same unity that certain 
men think differently in this matter, and do not dare to 
re-baptize. All of these catholic unity embraces in her 
motherly breast, bearing each other's burdens in turn, 
and endeavouring to keep the unity of the spirit in the 
bond of peace until the Lord should reveal to one or 
other of them if in any point they think otherwise than 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


as they should." ^ Unity, St. Augustin here says with 
great distinctness, is in a sense to be preferred to truth 
of opinion. That is to say, to violate the unity of fel- 
lowship on behalf of an opinion which may be tenable 
or true, but is not authoritative, is the schismatical 
temper, from which Cyprian was then most free when 
Stephen's intolerance put most pressure upon him to 
make rejoinder by counter-intolerance. Yet, "being 
most largely endowed with the holy bowels of Christian 
charity, he thought we ought to remain in Christian 
unity with those who differed from ourselves" in a matter 
lacking in ecumenical authority. 

It has been to the absence of a similar temper in 
East and West that the Great Schism was due. We 
make a grievous mistake if we suppose that it was the 
result of any single fact — like the claim of Rome or the 
Filioque clause : it was in fact nothing less than the issue 
of a long drawn-out tendency to divergence in the 
Eastern and Western Churches, manifesting itself at Con- 
stantinople, at Chalcedon, in the preliminary division 
on the Monophysite controversy, till finally, after long 
ages, it took effect in the final separation. That there 
was much of the schismatical temper in the Roman 
Church, who can deny? The temper which will not 
tolerate differences which interfere with that uniformity 
of outward government which it loves : which is impa- 
tient of resistance to its designs : which sacrifices the 
claims of historical truth, and mercy, and love, to the 

* See Augustin de Bapt, ii. 3-6, v. 25. He is following Jerome, 
who praises Cyprian on the same ground — that he did not 
anathematize those who differed from him {adv. Lucif, 25). 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


supremacy of a single see — this temper of intolerance 
and self-aggrandizement who can read history and deny 
it to have been a governing element in the policy of 
the Roman Church even when controlled by so great 
a pontiff as Leo the First ? Yet it is the temper of 
schism; it is responsible, in part, for the divisions it 
may create by retaliation and antagonism. It is 
human sin marring the divine witness to the unity of 
the Church's life. It fostered the spirit of antagonism 
in the Eastern Church — the blank conservatism which 
made * mountains of mole-hills ' ; and held a novelty of 
custom in the rival Church as bad as an innovation 
upon authoritative doctrine; it fostered the counter- 
ambition Which centred around the see of Constan- 
tinople ; these again are marks of the temper of schism 
from which no part of the Church has in fact been 
free. The Great Schism took place. It destroyed 
neither part of the Church, but it reduced the fulness 
of corporate grace and life in both. Who shall divide 
the sin ? No one but the great Judge. But we may 
be sure the schism will be perpetual, unless God's 
wonder-working power shall obliterate the temper of 
ambition and self-assertion in East and West, and 
granting to both the spirit of toleration in unessential 
differences, shall lead them again to be at one on the 
basis of agreement only in the common faith which 
has been the Church's heritage from the first. 

Again, the temper of schism produced the separation 
of the AngHcan Church from the rest of the West. In 
the Roman Church the temper of schism lay in the 
making a claim upon us so far greater than the uni- 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


versal consent of the Church could warrant. But who 
can deny that the schismatic spirit was at work in the 
Reformation in England? How much of impatient 
intolerance was there in the reforming spirit ! How 
carelessly it denounced ! How heedlessly it squandered 
priceless blessings in view of temporary or not irre- 
mediable evils ! How unwilling it was to admit any 
fault in itself! We must admit as much as can be 
claimed of provocation to the spirit of reform in the 
condition of the Church, we must admit how impossible 
it seems for a reformation ever to be conducted in a 
moderate spirit — this is only to admit that human sin 
is not without palliation, without excuse; it does not 
amount to acquittal or approval. 

And so with something of the schismatical temper, 
which is indeed nothing but the carnal temper of the 
old Adam, working in all parts of the Church, the holy 
bride of Christ on earth has reached her present divided 
and weakened condition. There is no catholic principle 
which can justify us in supposing that either the Roman, 
the Eastern, or the Anglican Church has been guilty of 
the sin of schism, in that sense in which schism is the 
act of self-withdrawal from the Church catholic. The 
English Church at the Reformation claimed to reform 
herself, and there is no catholic principle which forbade 
her to do it. She did not withdraw herself in so doing 
from the catholic Faith or the catholic Church ; indeed 
she professed' her intention to remain as fully in submis- 
sion to the Church as before. 

On this point indeed something remains to be said. 
For the present it is only intended to offer a brief 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


and summary reply to the Roman claim that we are 
ipso facto schismatic in being separated from Rome. 
To this claim we Anglicans may reply : 

1. There is no such thing as an absolute authority in 
any part of the Church. The authority of a pope is 
not even on his own showing greater than that of an 
apostle, yet at the last resort St. Paul conceives of 
an appeal behind even his own apostolic authority. 
" Though we, or an angel from heaven preach unto you 
any other gospel than that which we preached unto 
you, let him be anathema." Were then the authority of 
the papacy in Catholic tradition never so much greater 
than in fact it is, its authority could never be absolute, 
without appeal beyond it, unless it was indeed strictly 
infallible. But we are certain of nothing more than that 
truth shall never fail in the Church as a whole. 

2. The authority of the papacy was as a fact the 
result of her ecclesiastical and spiritual merits, and of the 
requirements of circumstance. Catholic history throws 
us back at the last resort on Cyprian's principle of the 
independence of each episcopate, or at least on Augus- 
tin's, of the subordination of each only to the whole as 
represented in a general council. All gradations among 
bishops are of the bene esse of the Church, not of her 
esse. " There is no evidence of any divinely appointed 
order among the bishops." ^ And of course, further 
than this, whatever claim Rome might have made as 
the Head of a united Christendom is enormously 
weakened in force by the existence of millions of the 
Oriental Church separated from her communion, largely, 

^ Roman Question p. 9. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


perhaps we should say mainly, on account of the ex- 
aggeration of her claim to empire over other churches. 

3. If it be urged that at least the ancient Church 
knew no permanent breaches of communion within her 
body and did not contemplate such as possible, we 
recognize the force of the objection. The fathers 
knew at least no breaches of communion as complete 
and permanent as we experience; they did not — St 
Augustin for example did not — even contemplate the 
possibility of the Church permanently losing the fellow- 
ship of intercourse and love.^ We can only reply by 
pointing out that St. Augustin was not a prophet of 
the future. He seems equally unable to contem- 
plate the Church of Christ perishing in any part of 
the world where she had once been founded, so as to 
require restoration or refounding from some other part. 
The Mohammedan conquests and the permanent sepa- 
rations in the Church have in both respects falsified his 
anticipations. To no man is it given exactly to antici- 
pate either the sorrows or the consolations of a future 
age. St. Athanasius — to give another instance of this — '- 
would have been shocked beyond measure if any one 
had told him that war would still be a feature in the 
national life of Christendom.^ 

But though all this argument be true, it is not the less 

^ See de unitate EccL There is however a remarkable chapter 
on the division of Judah and Israel (§ 33). Moreover there is 
nothing in the treatise about Rome as the centre of unity. On 
the indestructibility of the Church in any place where it has been 
planted see § 45. 

2 See de Incarn, 51, 52: he makes it one proof of Christ's Divinity 
that Greeks and barbarians, even the most savage races, when 
they become Christian cease to make war. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the case that the emphasis which the fathers lay on the 
outward fellowship of the universal Church ought to 
make us lay to heart *the great dangers we are in 
through our unhappy divisions.' At least there is the 
duty of acutely deploring the evil and praying for its 
remedy. It should never be forgotten that the saints in 
Jerusalem upon whose forehead was stamped the mark 
of the divine approval, were not those who had suc- 
cessfully counteracted, but those who felt and groaned 
over the evils under which God's people suffered.^ 
And we have the further duty of guarding in our own 
Church against the schismatical temper. We must be 
rid of the intolerance which makes an authoritative 
claim upon the belief of others for matters which fall 
short of ecumenical consent. We must cultivate the 
faculty of distinguishing between authoritative doctrine 
and pious opinion, so that we may not stretch the 
meaning of heresy and put unnecessary obstacles in 
the way of internal reunion. And in the wider sphere 
it is of the greatest importance that we should grasp 
the breadth of our heritage, that we should realize the 
spirit of the creed in which we profess our belief, not 
in the Anglican, but in 'One Holy Catholic Church*; 
and if it would not be lawful for us, as indeed it would 
not, for the sake of external peace, to trample under foot 
conscience and history, and submit to whatever claim 
Rome may make upon us, it is not less our duty to 
endeavour to purge our own Church from the evils and 
unfaithfulnesses which have too often made the charac- 
ter and nature of our true mother hard to recognize. 
^ Ezek. ix. 4. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



Every Church which claims her fellowship in the 
catholic fraternity must be prepared not only to show 
that she is not wilfully schismatical, but also, and before 
that, to meet two legitimate challenges — to vindicate 
her orthodoxy, and to vindicate her orders, that is, her 
claim to be within the historical succession of the 
Church's life. "Let them produce," says TertuUian, 
" the account of the origins of their Churches ; let them 
unroll the line of their bishops." ^ It is to meet this 
latter challenge in the case of the Anglican Church 
that we are now to apply ourselves. 

First, however, let us clear the ground of certain 
subsidiary issues. 

We set aside the question whether Rome has ever 
acknowledged or half acknowledged the validity of our 
orders. Our appeal all through has been behind Rome 
to the Church Catholic and it shall be so still. If our 
episcopate is questioned, so was St. Paul's apostolate, 
and we need not be more ashamed to defend ourselves 
than he was. 

Once more let us assume now that our present 
orders are derived through Matthew Parker, conse- 
^ Fraescr, 32. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


crated Archbishop of Canterbury in 1559, so that their 
validity depends on the question whether he was a true 
bishop : in other words let us dismiss the question 
whether, if we had lost valid orders, we should not have 
recovered them in the consecration of Laud and 
Williams, in whom converged the three lines of the 
Italian, the Irish, and the English succession. This 
question ^ we dismiss simply because we really do not 
need any secondary supports. 

I. Was then Matthew Parker validly consecrated? 
** Validly consecrated!" cried the Roman controver- 
sialist of old, "why, in place of consecration there was 
a sacrilegious scene in a tavern, when Scory, an apostate 
monk, struck the Queen's nominees on the head with a 
Bible, and bade them receive power to preach the word 
of God." 2 This " Nag^s Head " fable was an impudent 
assertion of the Romanists at the beginning of the 
seventeenth century. Its utter baselessness is now 
admitted on all hands. We quote Canon Estcourt — 
the author of by far the ablest and most scientific recent 
Roman work on Anglican orders.^ " It is very unfor- 
tunate that the Nag's Head story was ever seriously put 
forward \ for it is so absurd on the face of it that it 
has led to the suspicion of Catholic theologians not 
being sincere in the objections they make to Anglican 

^ Argued in Priest'' 5 Prayer Book '* Anglican Orders " p. 204. 

2 Courayer Anglican Ordinations p. 92. We have not given 
the legend in full. Among other absurdities it implies that Scory 
was not himself a Bishop. 

^ The Question of Anglican Ordinations p. 154. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


II. That Parker was consecrated, as is recorded in 
the Lambeth register, it is, as Canon Estconrt says, 
impossible to doubt : " It is impossible to doubt that 
everything did take place that fe recorded in the Regis- 
ter." ^ The ceremony took place "about five or six 
o'clock in the morning." William Barlow, formerly, i,e, 
before Mary's accession, bishop of Bath and Wells, now 
elect of Chichester, John Scory, formerly bishop of 
Chichester, now elect of Hereford, Miles Coverdale, 
formerly bishop of Exeter, and John Hodgkins, bishop 
suffragan of Bedford, vested, the first " in a silk cope 
for the performance of the sacred rites," with his two 
chaplains similarly vested, the second and last in "linen 
surplices," the third, Coverdale, " only in a long woollen 
gown," "after prayers and suffrages . . . laid their 
hands on the archbishop and said in English, m.. Take 
the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir up the 
grace of God, which is in thee by imposition of hands, 
etc. When this had been said, they gave the holy Bible 
into his hands, etc. After they had said this, the bishop 
of Chichester goes on to the remaining solemnities of 
the Communion, giving the archbishop no pastoral staff, 
with whom communicated the archbishop and the four 
other bishops mentioned above, with others beside." 
The historical truth of this account is now admitted. 
" But there is insufficient evidence " so runs the second 
plea " of Barlow himself having been consecrated." It 
would not be a matter of the first importance if this were 
doubtful, for all the consecrating bishops laid on their 

^ Pp. 96, 1 14. There is moreover a convergence of contemporary 
evidence. Priests Prayer Book p. 205. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


hands and all repeated the words} Each bishop, there- 
fore, performed the complete act of consecration, and 
the non-episcopal character of one of them would not 
affect the matter. But in fact there is no valid ground 
at all for doubting the fact of Barlow's consecration. 
The record of his actual consecration is indeed absent 
from the Lambeth Register,^ but that is confessedly 
incomplete: the record, to take one example among 
many, of the papalist Bishop Gardiner's consecration, 
against which nothing has ever been urged, is equally 
wanting.* On the other hand the supposition that he 
was not consecrated involves the most absurd con- 
sequences. It involves that a man, nominated bishop 
under Henry viii. (a.d. 1536) who was always 
emphatic in his desire to minimize the doctrinal and 
ritual changes effected by the Reformation,* could by a 

^ This was perhaps a precaution derived from the record of 
Chichele's consecration : see Pusey Eirenicon i. p. 232 corrected by 
Hutton AngU Ministry p. 324. Possibly, however, they were only 
► following the rubric of the Exeter Pontifical. At any rate they 
departed from the Rubric of 1552. That the assisting bishops are 
co-consecrators when they do not recite the words is certainly the 
more probable opinion. But when they all recite the words as 
well as lay on hands, there is surely no room for doubt. Yet that 
certainly occurred in this case, as Canon Estcourt admits p. 109. 
[1 may add that the supposition of the Register not representing 
simply the original account of the Consecration has no bearing, as 
Estcourt admits, on any of the matters stated above. "We have the 
evidence of the Foxe ms. and the MS. in C.C.C. Cambridge.] 

2 His confirmation is recorded. The Diocesan Registers of 
St David's and St. Asaph's, whence the omission might have been 
supplied, are lost. 

^ Button's Anglican Ministry p. 305. ** The absence of any 
record of consecration would carry little weight." 

* It is ludicrous in discussing this possibility to omit to consider 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


mere whim refuse to be consecrated, and get the arch- 
bishop and bishops who ought to have consecrated him 
to omit the ceremony, thereby subjecting themselves to 
the pains and penalties of the statute oi praemunire^ and 
this in the days before the pontifical was reformed, 
whereas that same archbishop Cranmer, under the 
extreme reformer Edward vi., forced Hooper to submit 
to consecration, though he openly protested against the 
ceremony. It involves that he could sit, unchallenged, 
among bishops hostile to the Reformation in Convoca- 
tion and the House of Lords — that he could get himself 
installed at St David's and could carry through a long 
dispute with his chapter in which they left no stone 
unturned to dispute his rights to the privileges of the 
see. It involves lastly that he could be recognized as 
bishop by the bishops who repudiated the Reformation, 
Lee, Stokesley, Gardiner, and be officially recognized as 
bishop of Bath and Wells on Mary's accession, when he 
resigned his see — it involves that he could do all this 
without its ever being detected that he had not been 
consecrated at all.^ Indeed the first men to doubt it 

this conservative character of the king — in aU respects opposed to 
the extreme Reformation party. Estcourt (p. 76) quite overlooks 
it. See Dr. Stubbs' Lectures p. 259 : Henry ** never forgot that 
he was the defender of the faith ; nor, whatever were his eccentri- 
cities and aberrations in minor particulars, does he seem ever to 
have gone in this region further in the direction of change than 
the more enlightened popes and cardinals of his own age would 
have gone" , . . "doctrinally, although quite able to maintain 
his own line, he clearly symbolized consistently with Gardiner and 
not with Cranmer." 

^ For details of these undoubted facts consult Estcourt, esp. p. 
78 ; Bailey's Defetice of English Orders especially on the dispute 
with the Chapter ; and Hutton p. 313. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


were men who lived eighty years after his consecration, 
and men of the class who invented and circulated the 
Nag's Head story. For it must always be remembered 
that when the imprisoned bishop Bonner in 1563 refused 
to take the oath of supremacy at the bidding of Home, 
bishop of Winchester, in whose diocese his prison was 
situated, on the ground that Home was " not elected, 
consecrated, and provided, according to laws of the 
Catholic Church, and the statutes and ordinances of 
this realm" — and that partly because his consecrator 
Parker was no tme archbishop, his objection to Parker 
consisted (as explained by Coke) in the plea that his 
consecrators * being bishops in the reign of Edward vi. 
were deprived in the reign of Queen Mary and were not 
restored before their presence at the consecration' — it 
was an objection, that is, to their legal status, not to their 
episcopal character.^ 

It is acknowledged 2 that there is no difficulty in 
assigning a date for Barlow's consecration. The fact in- 
deed is one which can be challenged only in that spirit 
of criticism which can dissolve the evidence for Christ's 
Resurrection 3 and which has been parodied in the 
memorable "Historic Doubts about Napoleon Bona- 
parte " of Archbishop Whately. 

^ See Coke ImtUutes Ed. 1648 Part iii. c. 2 p. 34, Part iv. c. 
17 pp. 321 f. ; cf. Estcourt I.e. p. 108, 118, and Bramhall Works 
iii. 79. 

2 Estcourt p. 67. 

^ It is indeed a matter more for profound regret, than for sur- 
prise, that Mr. Hutton, of the Oratory, who objected some years 
ago to the evidence for Anglican orders, now finds himself unable 
to accept the evidence for the Christian Religion. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


If it be urged that Barlow himself expressed contempt 
for his own orders, we reply that Barlow's own irrever- 
ence is admitted, but is at this stage of the argument 
nothing to the point : but Barlow's words when he said 
that "if the king's grace, being supreme head of the 
Church of England did nominate, choose, elect, any 
layman, being learned, to be a bishop, he so chosen, 
without mention made of any orders, would be as good a 
bishop as he {Barlow) was, or the best in England^^ — 
his words imply, as much as words could imply it, that 
Barlow had himself been duly consecrated. Indeed it 
is only pretended that he retained his position by a 
deliberate fraud, which would have exposed him to the 
greatest possible risks, for no assignable object in the 
world! "It is a mystery" Canon Estcourt admits 
"how he could have remained unconsecrated, or how 
he could have carried on his assumed character un- 
challenged, especially as he was involved in disputes 
with his Chapter." ^ But why should he have gone out 
of his way to remain unconsecrated, and on what pos- 
sible ground of reason in the absence of all positive 
evidence to the effect can we be asked to believe he did ? 

We may sum up this discussion by quoting two 
opinions — the first that of the Roman Catholic historian 
Lingard : " When we find Barlow during ten years, the 
remainder of Henry's reign, constantly associated, as a 
brother, with the other consecrated bishops, discharging 
with them all the duties, both spiritual and secular, of a 
consecrated bishop, summoned equally with them to 
parliament and convocation, taking his seat among 
1 P. 8i. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


them, according to seniority, and voting on all subjects 
as one of them ; it seems most unreasonable to suppose, 
without direct proof, that he had never received that 
sacred rite, without which, according to the laws of both 
Church and State, he could not have become a member 
of the episcopal body."^ The second shall be the 
opinion of Dr. DoUinger expressed so emphatically at 
the Bonn Reunion Conference ^ : " The result of my 
investigation is that I have no manner of doubt as to 
the validity of the episcopal succession in the English 
Church." 3 

In fact our opponents betray a consciousness of our 
secure historical position by their anxiety to do what 
they describe as " elevating the controversy to a higher 
ground." * Indeed that the real basis of their objec- 
tion is not historical is evidenced by the fact that 
they show no greater disposition to accept the succes- 
sion of the Anglican Church in Ireland than that in 

* History of England vi. p. 329 [note dd]. 
2 Bonn Conference 1874 p. 51. 

' The suspicions supposed to be justified by the peculiarities in 
the form of the grant of temporalities to Barlow (Estcourt p. 72) 
are dissolved by the discovery of an identical form of grant in the 
undisputed case of R. Ferrar (Rymer*s Fadera, London, 17 13, 
vol. XV. 173: "durante sua vita naturali"). The "suspicious 
circumstance" again of his being called "bishop" before conse- 
cration, when he was only bishop-elect, is now admitted to have 
many parallels and to have no "suspicions" attaching to it 
(Hutton Anglican Ministry p. 313). 

* This is Dr. Newman's expression in a preface to Mr. Hutton's 
Book — surely very unworthy of its great author : cf. Hutton pp. 

95» 394, 305. 

5 Church Quarterly vol. x. April 1880 p. 222. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


III. But perhaps the Anglican form of ordination 
does not satisfy the requirements of the catholic Church. 

* Of course it does not:' said the Roman controversialist 
of the seventeenth century. *The essence of valid 
ordination — the necessary matter and form — is the 
delivery to the priest of the chalice and paten with the 
words: "Receive the power to offer sacrifice" etc. 
The Anglican ordinal is by this single omission ren- 
dered null and void. They have no priests and 
therefore no bishops.' So they spoke in great cer- 
tainty, for indeed had not a pope in a solemn defini- 
tion of faith announced this very doctrine about the 

* sacrament of order ' to the Armenians at the time of 
the Council of Florence ? But alas for so satisfactory 
and conclusive an objection ! it emerged through the 
historical studies of the great Roman theologian Morinus 
in the latter part of the seventeenth century, that this 
ceremony— this ' porrectio instrumentorum ' — had been 
unknown in the Church for a thousand years, and the 
objectors had the double mortification of having the 
ground of their objection cut from under their feet, and 
of finding that the authoritative Roman theology had 
been elevating a ceremony of late introduction into the 
position of the * essential matter and form ' of orders, 
and degrading the true essential — the laying on of 
hands — into a subordinate and non-essential accom- 
paniment. At any rate we hear no more of this 
confident objection.^ 

* But if the laying on of hands is sufficient matter, 

^ See The Church and the Minhtry p. 6^ note * ; Estcourt 
pp. 261, 171, and Appendix I. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the words ** Receive the Holy Ghost," without specifica- 
tion ^ of the office of bishop or priest, are not sufficient 
form.' (* Form ' it may be explained means the formula 
or words essential to the validity of a sacrament.) 
This was the last stronghold of objection against the 
regularity of the externals of Anglican ordination ; and 
it is unnecessary that we should follow Anglican writers 
in arguing upon it, for Canon Estcourt has himself pro- 
duced a decision of the Roman Church authoritative 
and emphatic, in the case of the Church of Abyssinia, 
which crushes this objection. We simply quote Canon 
Estcourt's pages. 

"'Resolution of the Sacred Congregation of the 
Holy Office, given on Fer. iv., being the 9th of April 
1704. — In Ethiopia, as it is necessary that the persons 
to be ordained should assemble for their ordination 
from distant parts at the city where the schismatic 
archbishop resides, and as he will only hold an ordina- 
tion when persons to receive orders are collected 
together to the number of eight or ten thousand in the 
said city, he has therefore at such a time to ordain 
three or four thousand, or even more, in one day. In 
short, when those that are to receive the priesthood are 
arranged in ranks in the church, the archbishop passing 
hastily in front of them, imposes his hands on the head 
of each, saying Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, And for 
those to be ordained deacons he simply imposes the 
patriarchal cross on the head of each. And in con- 
sequence of the great multitude and the confusion and 

^ These specifications were introduced later into the Anglican 
Ordinations — in 1662. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the haste with which he proceeds, it follows that the 
archbishop on some does not impose his hands at all ; 
and in other cases does not pronounce the words of the 
form; and not a few even are passed over without 
either one or the other. Hence the question is. asked, 
whether priests and deacons in such a mode and form 
are validly ordained ; and consequently whether such a 
priest on becoming a catholic ought to be admitted 
to the exercise of his orders ; and by what rule in such 
circumstances ought a missionary to be guided ? 

* Resolution of the S.C. The ordination of a priest 
with imposition of hands and pronouncement of the 
form as stated in the case is valid ; but the ordination 
of a deacon simply with imposition of the patriarchal 
cross is altogether invalid. Hence in admitting presby- 
ters and deacons to the exercise of their orders after 
they have received the catholic faith, the following rules 
are to be observed : 

* If a priest should say absolutely, that he was ordained 
with imposition of hands and pronouncement of the 
form, and if there should be no other impediment, the 
missionary, after giving him a dispensation from irre- 
gularity, and absolution from excommunication, may 
admit him to the exercise of his orders according to 
the rite, approved and expurgated, in which he was 

* But if such a priest should ingenuously acknowledge 
that he has not a clear remembrance about the matter 
and form of his ordination, or if he has a doubt con- 
cerning either one or the other, he cannot be admitted 
to the exercise of his orders, till he has been ordained 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


conditionally. And if he should absolutely assert that 
the imposition of hands and pronouncement of the form 
had been omitted, or either of them, he must be re- 
ordained absolutely, before he can be admitted to the 
exercise of his orders. 

* But since it may happen that a person may have 
been validly ordained priest, though his ordination as 
deacon was invalid; in such a case, before he can 
exercise his orders, he ought, if it please the Sovereign 
Pontiff to grant faculties to the missionaries for that 
purpose, to receive a dispensation from irregularity, not 
only as having been ordained per saltum, but also as 
under suspension on account of the subsequent exercise 
of sacred orders, — at least for the time, until he can 
be validly promoted to the diaconate by a catholic 

" Such is this most important decision. And it will be 
seen at once that nothing could be more favourable to 
the Anglican side of the question. For it establishes 
the principle that the words Accipe Spiritum Sanctum 
are sufficient as a form of ordination to the priesthood ; 
it renders nugatory the argument raised by Talbot and 
Lewgar, that the distinctive order must be named in 
the form ; it makes it clear that, even if the Anglican 
form of the diaconate is invalid, this need not prevent 
the priesthood being validly conferred ; it removes any 
doubt whether the uncanonical mode of altering the 
Anglican form would of itself have made it invalid ; and 
it puts aside, as irrelevant, any questions whether the 
alteration was made by the Church or by the secular 
power ; for no one can trace the origin of the use of 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


this form among the Abyssmians, [it is not to be found 
in their books] or find any authority for it beyond a 
mere custom that has crept in without any record of its 

"The decision, indeed, refers only to the priest- 
hood. But in the face of such an indication of the 
mind of the Church, it would be unbecoming to raise 
the question whether those same words, Accipe Spiritum 
Sanctum, are insufficient as a form for the episcopate 

IV. It remains then as an admission even of our ad- 
versaries that the AngHcan form of ordination is in itself 
valid What then can hinder its acceptance in our case ? 
Something not outward but inward; the argument is 
again taken on to * higher ground' — even into the 
cloud-land of * intention,' or else our opponents are con- 
strained to make their appeal to a priori considerations 
of a very dangerous character. Thus Mr. Hutton, 
whose work we have alluded to above as having received 
the sanction of a preface from Cardinal Newman, 
appeals to the * moral evidence against the reality of the 
Anglican priesthood' — or again the ^prima facie Gwi^tnct^ 
* whose persuasiveness is greater than that of any bare 
arguments.' The Anglican Church in history has not, 
Mr. Hutton and Cardinal Newman think, looked as if it 
had a priesthood. It is almost charitable to suppose it 
has not had it. As if one were to argue from the un- 
worthy lives of Christians to the conclusion that they 
had not received the Baptismal grace. Has the average ■ 

^ Pp. 190-192. The decision of the S. C, given above was con- 
firmed in i860. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


life of Christians been such as to make this method of 
argument a secure one? Assuredly not; it has been 
such as to make it a constant pretext for schism. The 
true method of argument for a Catholic is to appeal to 
outward sacramental transactions in history, and rest 
assured that the outward transaction is the pledge 
of the inward grace, and that what is needed is not 
to doubt the adequacy of the formal transaction, but 
to stir up the inward grace. The Church of Eng- 
land is stirring up the inward grace of her priesthood. 
We are not arguing how much cause she may have 
to be ashamed of her past use of it. But we would 
vigorously maintain that all the security of the sacra- 
mental system is gone if we may argue from a general 
neglect of a gift to its non-existence. That * the tree is 
known by its fruits' is a great truth. It means that 
holiness can only proceed from the Holy Spirit, and 
that you can argue back from the effect to the cause. 
But it does not mean that there can be no such thing 
in the Christian Church — whether Oriental, Roman, 
or Anglican — as a talent hid away in a napkin, a light 
kept under a bushel. 

And now what is the doctrine of defective intention 
which is to invalidate Anglican orders ? That * the un- 
worthiness of the minister hinders not the grace of the 
sacraments,' is a great principle to which the Roman 
Church at least is thoroughly committed. Where you 
have the external conditions of validity for a sacrament, 
a right * form ' and * matter ' and * minister ' — to use the 
technical terms already explained — there no spiritual 
disqualification, whether in understanding or morals, on 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the part of the administrator, is a bar to the validity of 
the rite, and this because of the great principle that the 
giver of the grace is not the minister, but the Holy 
Spirit. This principle in regard to the validity of bap- 
tism and ordinations administered by heretics or schis- 
matics was fought out by St. Augustin against the 
Donatists. We assume it now and ask only — for what 
sort of doctrine of * requisite intention ' does this leave 
room ? For no more than that which Hooker asserts. 
"Furthermore" he says "because definitions are to 
express but the most immediate and nearest parts of 
nature, whereas other principles farther off, although not 
specified in defining, are notwithstanding in nature im- 
plied and presupposed, we must note that inasmuch as 
sacraments are actions religious and mystical, which 
nature they have not unless they ^xocQtd from a serious 
meaning ; and what every man's private mind is, as we 
cannot know, so neither are we bound to examine; 
therefore always in these cases the known intent of the 
Church generally doth suffice, and where the contrary 
is not manifest, we may presume that he which out- 
wardly doth the work, hath inwardly the purpose of 
the Church of God." 

If the requirement of intention reaches beyond this 
point, it becomes as Jewel calls it " the very dungeon of 
uncertainty." "The heart of man is unsearchable ; if 
we stay upon the intention of a mortal man, we may 
stand in doubt of our own baptism." Even within this 
narrow limit we must recollect that the old story of the 
baptism by the boy Athanasius shows that the church- 
men of the early days could regard as valid a baptism 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


administered in play.^ But we may assent freely to 
Hooker's requirement of intention. We need it, to 
guard against the possibility of sacraments being con- 
secrated by accident, through a chance collocation of 
words and materials. This much, then, is granted and 
no more. In applying this principle to the present con- 
troversy, we base our contention on the statement of it 
given by Canon Estcourt.^ 

" The intention requisite for the valid administration 
of a sacrament is the intentio generalis faciendi quod 
facit ecclesia. Hence a sacrament conferred with the 
correct matter and form by a heretic, or even an atheist, 
is valid, if he intends to do that rite which the Church 
does, — and not specially the Roman Church, but the 
Church in confuso ; even though he might not believe 
in the reality of the sacrament. And supposing the 
form be clear and genuine, and the sense of the words 
is preserved in its integrity, even if the form were 
changed with an erroneous or heretical intent, the 

^ The evidence for this depends, not on the truth of the story, 
but on its prevalence, as against Hutton, p. 179. 

2 P. 199 of. Card. Newman Via Media vol. i. p. 339. ** In 
like manner even though a bishop were to use the words, * receive 
ye the Holy Ghost,' with little or no meaning, or a priest the con- 
secrating words in the Eucharist, considering it only a com- 
memoration of Christ's death, or a deacon the water and the 
words in baptism, denying in his heart that it is regeneration ; yet 
they may in spite of their unbelief, be instruments of a power they 
know not of; and 'speak not of themselves.'" To this is 
appended in the last edition (1877) the note ** Certdnly, if the 
power has been given them." Of course the Roman Church must 
grant the validity of orders conferred by unbelievers, to meet, for 
example, such a case as that of Prince Talleyrand, bishop of Autun, 
and no doubt many other cases in the Middle Ages and at the time 
of the Italian Renaissance. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


sacrament would still be valid. For no amount of 
heretical intention would invalidate it, provided that he 
intended in a general way to do what the Church does, 
and that he does not overthrow or destroy the legitimate 
sense of the words." 

Well now, had the English Church of the Reforma- 
tion period — not any individual bishop, but the English 
Church, as represented in the official utterances of her 
Ordination rite — had she this 'general intention of 
doing what the Church does,' not the Roman Church, 
but the Church * in the vague ' ? Did she intend to 
continue the old orders of the Church, and did there- 
fore every Anglican bishop (as officially representing 
the Church, not * in his private mind ') have the only 
sort of intention which can be possibly allowed to be 
requisite ? It is surely sufficient answer to quote the 
language of the Preface to our services of ordination : 
" It is evident unto all men diligently reading the Holy 
Scripture and ancient authors, that from the Apostles' 
time there have been these orders of ministers in 
Christ's Church — Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. 
Which offices were evermore had in such reverent 
estimation that no man might presume to execute any 
of them, except he were first called, tried, examined . . . 
and also by public prayer, with imposition of hands, 
were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful 
authority. And therefore, to the intent that these 
orders may be continued, and reverently used and 
esteemed in the Church of England, etc." * To the 
intent that these orders may be continued^ I — there is, 
then, we contend, no further ground of argument on 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


this score. The English Church had a serious mind to 
continue the old orders in the Reformed Church ; for 
their continuance she provided a proper minister, and 
proper rite, valid in * matter and form/ What further 
ground of attack is there ? Mr. Hutton falls back on a 
doctrine of the private intention of the celebrant of a 
sacrament which would make all orders precarious- 
nay, all sacraments.^ We say with St. Thomas Aquinas ^ : 
" The minister of a sacrament acts as the representative 
(in persona) of the whole Church of which he is the 
minister ; in the words which he utters, the intention of 
the Church is expressed^ which suffices to the perfection 
of a sacrament, unless the contrary be expressed out- 
wardly on the part of the minister, or recipient of the 

Canon Estcourt falls back rather on a doctrine 
which is both wanting in catholic authority and surely 
tends to militate against the true principle of sacra- 
mental grace. The Church (it is maintained) only 
confers by her sacraments what she intends to confer. 

' Pp. 179, 327. 

2 Summay pars iii. q. Ixiv. art, 8. Of course a later school of 
Roman theologians would not admit this doctrine. But we are 
not concerned to maintain that no school of theologians, on any 
principle they may devise, can object to Anglican orders, but only 
that they cannot be objected to on grounds which can be called 
catholic. How insecure an extreme requirement of inward in- 
tention may make all orders is shown by Mr. Hutton*s own 
statement, p. 523 : — 

" Accepting as we do the position that the succession is con- 
tinued through single lines and not by way of threefold interlacing 
cords, we have to maintain that each bishop in the chain which 
historically connects, say Cardinal Manning with the Apostles, 
was validly baptized, validly ordained to the priesthood, and 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


If the mind of the Anglican Church can be shown to be 
deficient on the doctrine of the priesthood, it follows 
that she did not intend by her priesthood all that the 
catholic Church intends by it — therefore she did not 
convey to her ministers what lay outside her own con- 

To this our reply is twofold : so far as we are here 
dealing with an attack upon the orthodoxy of the Eng- 
lish Church, we prefer to deal with the matter on its 
own ground. Whether a Church has orders and 
whether she is orthodox are ttvo questions, not one.^ 

But so far as the doctrine is asserted that the grace 
given by a sacrament depends on the mind of the par- 
ticular part of the Church in which it is administered, 
we entirely decline to accept the doctrine. We believe 

validly consecrated to the episcopate. ... It must be allowed 
that this position is, humanly speaking, indefensible. But 
Catholics are, nevertheless, absolutely certain that they have the 
true ministerial succession, inasmuch as it is as indefectible as is 
the Church herself. ' 

And in a note : — 

" Catholics, of course, are not called upon to hold that in no 
single case has there been a bishop who for lack of valid baptism, 
ordination, or consecration, was a bishop only in name. But 
they may well believe that the government of the Church would 
be so providentially ordered as to hinder such a person from being 
called on to continue the succession. It falls to the lot of com- 
paratively few bishops to act as the principal consecrator of 

^ Canon Estcourt argues in a manner unworthy of him in his 
miserable Chapter vi. in which he tries to explain away the 
language of the English office for the Ordination of Priests. Has 
he read Hooker Bk. v. cap. Ixxvii. ? If he has he will know 
what objections the puritans made against the Anglican Ordination 
office and what Hooker's conception of Order is. He gives to the 
Anglican office a meaning than which it cannot carry a lower. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


that a baptism administered in due form by Baptists, is 
valid, in spite of their heretical mind, formally expressed, 
on baptism. The grace of a sacrament depends not on 
the mind of any particular part of the Church, but on 
the intention of the Holy Ghost which can find expres- 
sion only in the catholic doctrine of the whole Church. 
We are ready enough to vindicate the orthodoxy of 
the Anglican Church. But had she denied in toto the 
sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist, as she has assuredly 
not done, her denial would have affected her position 
in orthodoxy, not her orders. The grace of orders 
depends on the original intention and will of the Holy 
Ghost, and all that we do is to hand on the gift by a 
sacramental method. The method is intrusted to us ; 
the gift is given by Him : and our insufficient conception 
of it does in no wise impair its fulness. St. Augustin's 
language on this subject is quite explicit. " Accordingly^ 
if Marcion consecrated the sacrament of Baptism with 
the words of the Gospel * in the name of the Father 
and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,' the sacrament 
was complete, though his faith was not complete, but 
stained with error. ... If sacraments are the same they 
are everywhere complete, even when they are wrongly 
understood." "If a man^ offers an erroneous prayer 
(in baptism) God is present to uphold the words of His 
gospel, without which the baptism of Christ cannot 
be consecrated, and He Himself consecrates His sacra- 
ment, that in the recipient who turns in truth to God 
either before he is baptized, when he is baptized, or 
at some future time, that very sacrament may be profit- 
* de Bapt. iii. 15. ^ vi. 25. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


able to salvation, which were he not to be converted, 
would be powerful to his destruction. But who is there 
who does not know that there is no baptism of Christ, 
if the words of the gospel in which consists the outward 
visible sign be not forthcoming? But you will more 
easily find heretics who do not baptize at all, than any 
who baptize without those words. And therefore we 
say, not that every baptism (for in many of the blasphe- 
mous rites of idols men are said to be baptized), but 
that the baptism of Christ, that is, every baptism con- 
secrated in the words of the Gospel, is everywhere the 
same, and cannot be vitiated by any perversity on the 
part of any men." 

V. There is still one more charge to which we must 
reply. It is asserted that the English bishops, if they 
have valid orders, have no jurisdiction^ and though 
this is in effect only the charge of Schism revived in 
another form, it is necessary not to leave it unanswered. 

Consecration we must explain conveys in one sense 
a universal mission, a share in Christ's universal com- 
mission to * go and make disciples of all nations.' Each 
Apostle had, and each bishop has, in an abstract sense, 
this universal mission which carries with it, and indeed 
is not distinguishable from, what, in the technical 
language of theology, may be called * habitual ' juris- 
diction.i But even amongst the Apostles the exercise of 
this jurisdiction was limited by mutual arrangement,^ 
and in the early Church every bishop was limited to a 

1 See Church Quarterly \oh xi. Jan. i88i : Mission and Jurisdic- 
tiofit and Blunt's Did. of Hist, and Doct, Theol., Art. Jurisdiction. 

2 Gal. ii. 9, Rom. xv. 20, 2 Cor. x. 13-16. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


proper diocese, in which alone he was allowed to exercise 
his functions. Within this sphere alone he has actual 
jurisdiction^ i.e. the ecclesiastical right to exercise his 
functions. Actual jurisdiction is indeed to be regarded, 
not as a gift super-added to the gift of order, but as the 
right to exercise this gift within the limit determined 
by ecclesiastical arrangements from time to time. In 
Erastian epochs of the Church's life, as under the 
Byzantine emperors, under Frankish kings, or in periods 
of the English Church, the secular authority has had a 
predominant, or even practically exclusive, power over 
these arrangements, but however the limits of actual 
jurisdiction are settled, the jurisdiction itself is regarded 
(from the only point of view which can be called 
catholic) as inherent in the see. It is entered upon 
when any bishop is enthroned in his see in a canonical 
manner, and the idea of a bishop consecrated to no see 
was abhorrent to the Church's mind. That the pope is 
the sole source of jurisdiction, and that the Anglican 
bishops when they ceased to be recognized by the 
pope became ipso facto schismatic, is no doubt a claim 
of the papacy and a mediaeval doctrine, but it has been 
made sufficiently plain in earlier chapters that it has no 
claim to be regarded as part of the Church's catholic 
heritage. It would indeed be nothing less than ludi- 
crous to apply the idea at all to early church history.^ 
Now I do not think that any one would really dream of 

^ * * Readers of history hardly need to be told that the bishop of 
Rome was never asked to give either mission or jurisdiction to 
anybody for the first six centuries of the Christian era.'* Church 
Quarterly l.c. p. 403. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


questioning the jurisdiction of the Anglican episcopate 
except on the basis of the idea that the pope is the sole 
fount of jurisdiction, and as that position has been 
already dealt with — as it has been made quite plain 
that the whole Anglican position involves an appeal 
behind the papacy to the principles of the ancient and 
the universal Church — I cannot think this question of 
jurisdiction a very serious one. Church history presents 
us with innumerable irregularities in episcopal succes- 
sion, but we are not allowed to go back upon them. 
I hope to show that the technical defence of Anglican 
jurisdiction is adequate, but if it were much less 
adequate than it is, the contention would still hold 
that the Anglican succession holds the ground legiti- 
mately by default. There was no rival claimant to the 
see of Canterbury. It is quite true that the atmosphere 
of the Tudor kingdom is not an atmosphere in which 
the free canonical action of the Church is likely to 
flourish, but the 'Erastian' authoritativeness of the 
Tudors is quite as prominent in Mary's reign as in 
Edward's or Elizabeth's, and no more destroys the pos- 
sibility of jurisdiction in Anglican prelates, than in 
Byzantine or Prankish bishops of similar epochs. 

With this preface, we advance our technical defence, 
which must be based on a brief review of the ecclesias- 
tical situation at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign. 

The * concession' of the clergy in 1531 which ac- 
knowledged his Majesty Henry viii. "the sole pro- 
tector of the Church and clergy of England, its unique 
and supreme lord, and, as far as Christ's law allows, 
even its supreme head," had been passed without any 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


dissent in the convocation of Canterbury, and in the 
convocation of York with no more than Tunstal's 
protest on the ground that " though to most men the 
words seem without danger of any offence, yet some 
suspected of heresy . . . taking their sense perversely 
have endeavoured to escape the judgment of their 
bishops." Tunstal moreover accepted the headship 
subsequently, as well as an abjuration of the papal 
authority, when Parliament, in accordance with the 
resolution of convocation, required him, with the other 
bishops, to swear to it.^ This resolution accords well 
with a petition commonly attributed to convocation,^ 
that if the Pope should persist in demanding the pay- 
ment of Annates "the obedience of the king and 
people be withdrawn " from the see of Rome, as in like 
case the French king " withdrew the obedience of him 
and his subjects " from Pope Benedict xiii. ; and with 
the declaration of three years later, " the Pope had not 
any greater jurisdiction conferred upon him by God 
than any other foreign bishop." ^ Nothing was done in 
Mary's reign to reverse formally these synodical acts. 
They were of course reversed, but only by Act of 
Parliament, and the same authority cancelled these 
reversals in the first year of Elizabeth. This certainly 
left it open to the Queen to act upon the unrepealed 

^ See Mr. Gladstone's Elizabethan Settlement of Religion 
{Nineteenth Cent, July 1888) p. 7. The remainder of this chapter 
is largely based on this article. 

' Wilkins* Concilia iii. 760, but legitimate doubt has been 
thrown upon its origin, and I desire to express no opinion ; see 
Preface, p. vii, on Mr. Rivington's second letter. 

' There was a similar resolution of the York convocation. 
Collier Eccl Hist, iv. 263. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


declarations of the convocation, all the more that the 
episcopal body which met with its composition un- 
changed at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign under her 
brief, took no steps at all, even at the solicitation of the 
lower house, to repudiate its. earlier action.^ When 
therefore a legal oath was required of the bishops, an 
oath " which asserted on the behalf of the Crown less 
than was contained in the unrepealed and still effective 
declaration of the Anglican convocations" there was 
nothing irregular in the requirement, and, considering 
the period at which it occurred, nothing violent in their 
deprivation for refusal to take it. It happened curiously 
enough that of the twenty-seven bishops alive at the 
Queen's accession, eleven died before she took action. Of 
the remaining sixteen, all but one — Kitchen of Landaff 
— refused the oath. They had withdrawn from the posi- 
tion which even Bishops of a conservative mind were 
not afraid in most cases to take up in Henry's reign. 
Their consequent deprivation was justified by the action 
of the Church and was in accordance with the law of 
the land.2 It contrasted in this respect with the utterly 
unconstitutional way in which Mary, following Edward's 
precedent, had deprived a great number of bishops 
simply by royal commission, with no justification at all. 
It should be noted further that four or five of the 
bishops deprived by Queen Elizabeth had died before 
any measures were taken to supply anew the episcopal 
bench, and of the remaining ten or eleven, at least four 

^ Gladstone /.<:. p. 11. 

^ They were deprived for refusal to take the oath, not for their 
previous refusal to consecrate Parker. Lingard vi. 8. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


or five were disqualified altogether for appealing to their 
canonical rights, inasmuch as they had been most 
uncanonically introduced into their sees by Queen 
Mary in the lifetime of their proper occupants.^ 

Thus when Parker was consecrated it was by bishops 
as canonically ^provincial' as was. possible under the cir- 
cumstances. Coverdale, formerly bishop of Exeter, had 
been quite uncanonically deposed on Mary's accession, 
and Barlow had only resigned under pressure. Scory 
and Hodgkins were bishops within the province, who 
could be properly summoned to assist. The former 
indeed had held the see of Chichester,^ and was now 
elect of Hereford, as Barlow was of Chichester. 
Thus, as the see of Canterbury was duly vacated by 
death : as Parker was elected by the chapter and con- 
firmed without opposition in Bow Church : as he was 
consecrated by bishops of whom two or three could 
rightly be called provincial: as there was no official 
or formal protest at the time and no rival claimant 
to the see : as finally the formal withdrawal of the 
Romanist body from the jurisdiction of the Anglican 
episcopate did not take place for eleven years, and even 
then there was no estabUshment of a rival episcopate — 
we cannot see how any objection can be raised to the 
claim of Parker and his successors to sit in the seat of 
Augustin, and to inherit the jurisdiction which belongs 
to that see. 

1 Palmer On the Church i. p. 486. He also points out that 
four or five others had been put into their sees by papal provisions 
contrary again to the mind of the English Church as represented 
in the declaration of convocation, twenty years before. 

2 He was intruded by Edward and dispossessed by Mary. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



If enough has already been said to vindicate the 
Church of England against the charge of wilful schism, 
and against such imputations upoii the validity of her 
orders as would thrust her out of the Church's con- 
stitutional unity — yet a reply has still to be made on 
the charge of heresy. 

What is heresy ? It is the self-willed repudiation by 
an individual or a part of the Church of the authoritative 
rule of faith, especially as embodied in some ecumenical 
dogmatic decree. What the standard of faith is has 
been explained already at some considerable length* It 
remains to ask whether the English Church has rebelled, 
against it. 

The Reformation in England was not primarily a 
doctrinal movement at all. In its first intention it was 
a movement to repudiate papal usurpation, and good 
care was taken to emphasize the stability of the Anglican 
position as regards doctrine. " Our said sovereign the 
king and all his natural subjects, as well spiritual as 
temporal, continue to be as obedient, devout, catholic 
and humble children of God and holy Church as any 
people be within any realm christened."^ Afterwards, 

^ Stat. 23 Henry viii. c. 20. See Hardwick Church History 
Reformation p. 179. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


the doctrinal movement became much more prominent, 
but the intention of the Anglican Church was never 
lost sight of — it was to repudiate abuses and later accre- 
tions and to retain the original and catholic doctrine. 
The convocation which imposed on the clergy subscrip- 
tion to the Articles of Religion, issued a canon to 
preachers enjoining them to "teach nothing in their 
sermons which they should require to be devoutly held 
or believed by the people except what is agreeable to 
the doctrine of the Old and New Testaments, and what 
the ancient fathers and catholic bishops have collected 
out of that said doctrine." The "authority of the 
Church in controversies of faith " is maintained in the 
Articles, and the intention of the Anglican branch not 
"to forsake or reject the Churches of Italy, France, 
Spain and Germany " except in points where they were 
fallen from " their ancient integrity and from the Apo- 
stolical Churches," is asserted in the Canons. So also 
the formal appeal of Anglican divines as a whole has 
been to the * quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab om- 
nibus ' and to Scripture. 

But, however good her abstract intention, may not 
the English Church in fact have been betrayed into 
some authoritative and formal repudiation of an inte- 
gral part of the Catholic faith, during the wild confusion 
of the Reformation epoch ? The question, we must 
observe, is as to formal and authoritative repudiation. 
There was a wild teaction against Mediaevalism during 
the sixteenth century, and many of the extreme reformers 
in England and in Europe generally held views which 
we could not acquit of heresy, but we are not in any 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


way committed to their views, except so far as they have 
affected our formularies. 

There are two further remarks which we must make 
by way of preliminary. Persons whom it would be hard 
to acquit of heresy have been teachers in the Church of 
England in the sixteenth century and later, and we may 
be therefore quite sure that the standard of doctrinal 
discipline in the Church of England has been often un- 
satisfactory : — but there is a vital distinction between 
-heresy and a failure of doctrinal discipline. We admit 
the charge of doctrinal laxity sorrowfully enough, but 
undiscipline does not unchurch a Church. A man may 
cry out with St. Basil : **Our tribulations are proclaimed 
the whole world over. The doctrines of the fathers 
are despised ; the apostolic traditions are reckoned for 
nothing ; the discoveries of innovating men hold sway 
in the Churches ; men are no longer theologians but 
logical disputants. True shepherds are banished and 
grievous wolves are brought in." ^ Such a condition of 
things cannot be deplored too deeply, nor can we strive 
too earnestly after a remedy for it, but the evil is not 
that the Church's teaching is heretical, but that men 
are allowed to teach in her name what is not her 
doctrine. 2 This undiscipline in doctrine is at least no 
worse than undiscipline in morals. Tolerated teach- 
ing of error no more decatholicizes a Church than 

1 Ep. xc 

^ It is important also to notice that peopfe are often accused of 
heresy when they should only be accused of rash language. Mr. 
Rivington speaks as if there were a good deal of denial of ever- 
lasting punishment in the Church of England. It seems to me 
that a great many who use what seems very rash language, guard 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


tolerated laxity of clerical morals, of which the Middle 
Ages suggest only too many examples, extending over 
great epochs of time. No doubt the English Church 
largely sold her freedom to exercise her own discipline 
in payment for her position in the State, and the crip- 
pling of her disciplinary action is the penalty, the sore 
and humiliating penalty, for her undue confidence in the 
permanent Churchmanship of the national rulers. We 
attempt no sort of justification for the deplorable sub- 
ordination to the State into which the English Church 
allowed herself to be betrayed, but Erastianism no more 
decatholicizes the doctrine of the English Church than 
it did that of the Byzantine Church of old or of the 
Frankish Church in the Middle Ages. 

The other preliminary remark which must be made is 
this. There are in every age a number of misleading 
phrases justified by prescription but by nothing else, 
adopted simply because they save the trouble of thought 
and have a sort of authoritative sound which is the next 
best substitute for truth. Among such phrases is the 
* Reformation settlement.' It requires very little know- 
ledge to make us see that in no department of human 
action, political or social, intellectual or theological, was 
the Reformation age an age which admitted of * settle- 
ment.' It was an age of awakening, an age of transition, 
but that is just the opposite of an age of settlement. 
As in every other department of life so it was in theology. 

themselves against denying it, e.g, notably Dr. Farrar : see Mercy 
afid Judgment p. I : "I have never denied and do not now deny 
the possible endlessness of punishment." Cf. Pusey's letter to 
him, quoted by himself : Guardian, Oct. 10, 1888, p. 1503. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


The Roman theology of the Council of Trent represents 
no final settlement. It is theology at the half-way house 
between catholicity pure and simple, and Ultramontane 
Romanism. Has the history of the Calvinist and 
Lutheran Churches suggested the idea that their 
theology reached a * settlement * in the days of their 
respective founders? As for the English Church, her 
theological intention was good, and she was mercifully 
spared the action upon her of any of those masterful 
individualities and uncatholic wills, which helped the 
foreign Reformations down different roads of heretical 
defection. But when we ask whether the English 
Church of the Reformation arrived at a satisfactory 
statement of doctrine in accordance with her funda- 
mental intentions — at a permanent * settlement — we 
must, we fancy, answer to a great extent in the negative. 
She was in fact suffering from reaction, and her formulas 
are too often protests against what is exaggerated or 
false, rather than statements of what is true. She was 
more at pains to arrive at a working compromise than at 
a clear statement. Indeed she had not, the Church at 
large had not, a knowledge of ancient liturgies or ancient 
theology, such as would have admitted of a position 
being formulated which could be regarded as (from a 
simply catholic point of view) a satisfactory settlement. 
When we have said this it becomes apparent that we 
do not think catholic-minded people can be in any 
idolatrous attitude towards the English Reformation, or 
indeed that we can take an optimistic view of the pro- 
cess. The ship of the Church went through a great 
storm — she lost a great deal, not only in decoration and 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


accoutrements, but in rigging and in bulwarks, but she 
came out of that storm — the ship. So far then we can 
accept the statement of our case from Cardinal New- 
man's lips : " There was a very trying interval for the 
Church of England in the sixteenth century, when it 
ran great risk of being wrecked ; but it weathered the 
storm, and its good fortune may be regarded as a 
providence and become a positive argument for its 
being what ... its great history betokens." ^ 

And now to enter more into detail — the Church of 
England is conspicuously orthodox on the great funda- 
mentals of the Trinity and the Incarnation. She accepts 
— as an establishment no less than as a Church — the 
ecumenical Councils as criteria of heresy.^ Nor is it 
merely that her Creeds and Articles are formally 
orthodox. It is true further that no Church can boast 
a richer, more eloquent, more learned, or more power- 
ful body of theology, dogmatic and apologetic, than the 
post-Reformation Church of England can exhibit on 
these subjects, beginning with Richard Hooker and 
coming down to the present day. 

But it may be urged that even the Incarnation is not 
rightly held unless it be held in its proper relation to us 
and our present lives — unless it be viewed in its 'exten- 
sion' in the Church and through the sacraments. 
Here, then, also, the orthodoxy of the English Church 
does not admit of a doubt. She plainly asserts that the 
sacraments are means of grace, are the means through 
which the grace of the new life of -Christ is com- 

* Pref. to Hutton*s Anglican Ministry p. viii. 
2 Stat, I Elizabeth. See Hard wick p. 225. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


municated to us. Her definition of sacraments in 
general as "effectual signs of grace" is simply the 
definition of the Roman schools. It asserts that the 
sacraments are symbols, and not only symbols — that 
they also effect or convey what they symbolize — they are 
* practica ' or * efficacia signa gratiae.' This is undoubt- 
edly the catholic doctrine, which as it is implied with 
reference to Baptism in the Nicene Creed, so it is 
further expounded with great clearness with reference 
to Baptism and the Eucharist in the later part of the 

Then with reference to the Holy Eucharist in par- 
ticular the Church of England unmistakeably teaches 
that the Body and Blood of Christ are therein given, 
taken and eaten, after a spiritual and heavenly manner 
— that (in Hooker's words) " Christ in the Sacrament 
imparteth Himself even in His whole entire Person unto 
every soul that receiveth Him." Further that "what 
merit, force, or virtue soever there is in His sacrificed 
Body and Blood, we freely, fully, and wholly have it by 
this Sacrament," for " here we receive Christ and those 
graces that flow from Him in that He is man," "and 
the effect thereof is a real transmutation of our souls 
and bodies from sin to righteousness, from death and 
corruption to immortality and life." This is beyond a ' 
doubt the positive and emphatic teaching of the Anglican 
Prayer-book, and it was not for no purpose that she 
brought back into emphasis the indirect but most real 
effect of the Holy Communion upon our bodies^ a truth 
of which much had been made in the early Church. 
Beyond this if the formulas of the Church do not com- 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


mit us to any definite view as to the nature of Christ's 
presence in the sacrament we must remember that there 
was no formulated dogma of Catholic authority on the 
subject, that the moment was by no means opportune 
for definition, and that very possibly no more exact de- 
termination of the doctrine than existed in the ancient 
Church is even desirable. At any rate the absence of 
it is not heretical.^ 

It is not however at all reasonable to dispute that 
there are defects in the teaching of the English formu- 
laries taken alone, and it is necessary to refer to them. 

We do conceive that in her desire to restore the 
communion of the people to its proper prominence in 
the eucharistic office, and in her reaction from mediaeval 
misconceptions, and abuses connected with the * mass- 
ing priests,' the Church of England unduly obscured 
and threw into the background the doctrine of the 
eucharistic sacrifice. She is not heretical. Her 31st 
Article is only intended to guard jealously the unique 

^ See Keble's Letters cxviii-cxxi. It would appear that while 
the English Church (a) excludes a materialistic view of the Real 
Presence in the * declaration on kneeling,' and the current view of 
transubstantiation, and [h) on the other side affirms a real com- 
munication of the Body and Blood of Christ in the sacrament, 
she may be said to leave the intermediate ground open. This is 
Bossuet's view of the matter and it can hardly be described as 
unfair. It must be remembered however that when the declara- 
tion on kneeling was reinstated in 1662, the words which 
condemned adoration in the Sacrament of a * real and essential 
presence there being of Christ's natural flesh and blood ' were 
struck out (they had no more than the authority of an order of 
council in 1552 and had no existence in Elizabeth's Prayer-book) 
and the words 'corporal presence of Christ's natural flesh and 
blood ' substituted. Thus the Church deliberately refused to con- 
demn an adoration of Christ really present. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


completeness of the sacrifice made by Christ upon the 
Cross — to guard it, moreover, not as against any formu- 
lated doctrine such as that of Trent, but as against a 
current popular view ; and who that knows what is * com- 
monly said' even now in Roman books, popular and 
theological^ can doubt that it needs guarding ?i For the 
Eucharist is not even mystically a renewal of Christ's 
passion but an act of co-operation with Christ's heavenly 
intercession. Christ upon the eucharistic altar is only 
* offered ' in the sense that His once-made sacrifice is 
there perpetually presented and pleaded before the 

^ I quote, as an instance, Canon Gilbert's Love of/esus Fifteenth 
Edition, with the imprimatur of Cardinal Manning pp. 41, 46 : 
" With the penalty of Thy Life Thou didst make Thyself a sacri- 
fice on Calvary, and that it might never be forgotten, every day on 
Thy altar thou art again mystically crucified," "We hold that 
here in a mystical manner Thy Body and Blood are separated, 
and that Thou art, as it were, again nailed to the Cross, and pre- 
sented to Heaven as a holocaust, for the propitiation of the sins of 
the world." " We confess that the same love for us which once 
made Thee leave heaven and become man, and hence a Victim on 
the Mount of Sorrows, causes Thee ... to descend daily on the 
Altar ; thereby renewing Thy Birth in Bethlehem and Thy death 
on Calvary , . . Innumerable Hosts . . . each a world of love 
and propitiation, are offered up as an atonement between heaven 
and earth . . . The heart of Jesus once more saves us, and 
changes His Father's wrath into mercy. . . . Why was not one 
Atonement, dearest Lord, one Sacrifice, one Calvary sufficient? 
. . . Thou knewest . . . that we should contemn Thy first Sacri- 
fice ^ and so, dearest Lord, every day Thou art sacrificed again^ 
There are many pages in the same strain, it being constantly 
implied that the * immolation ' of Calvary is constantly repeated. 
I imagine the 31st Article to be a protest against such current 
teaching and also against the false position assigned to the priest 
in current theology ; cf. The Church and the Ministry p. 85. But 
it is no doubt a great evil to have such vague protests against 
unformulated teaching, not balanced by positive statement. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Father, as in heaven, so on earth. The altar is, so to 
speak, on a line not with Calvary, but with the heavenly 

Unfortunately however, — there being no authoritative 
dogma to force the compilers of our Prayer-book to 
positive statement — they contented themselves with an 
indefinite protest against current error and gave no 
positive teaching on the Eucharistic sacrifice. The force 
of the Protestant reaction was further allowed to rob the 
Anglican Eucharistic office of a great deal of quite 
primitive language. No doubt we retained the words 
from the pre-Reformation Mass about ' the Sacrifice of 
Praise,' and no doubt the words retain their ancient 
meaning : ^ further since Andrewes put out his formal 
reply to Bellarmine : " do ye Romanists take your tran- 
substantiation out of the Mass, and we shall have no 
further dispute with you about the Sacrifice/' ^ a succes- 
sion of English theologians in every century have taught 
the doctrine with sufficient clearness, and it has had a 

^ I think it is only later associations of Protestantism which can 
lead us to doubt this. The sacrifice of the Mass had been called 
the * sacrifice of praise ' in Latin, and Eucharist (thanksgiving) in 
Greek. It was so called because we are not in it * pleading for 
admission within the veil,' but claiming, or praising God for, a 
privilege already won in the acceptance of Christ. Also there is 
no doubt that the words * remembrance ' in the catechism and 
'memory' in the consecration prayer bear naturally their old 
meaning of a commemoration before God : so Andrewes interprets 
the word * memory ' {Respons, ad Bellarm, p. 251). For the use 
of the word I should like to refer to the * * Theologia Naturalis " 
of a later schoolman Raymund of Sabunde (Tit. 289) which affords 
remarkable analogies to the Anglican consecration prayer as his 
Tit. 287 (latter part) does to the * prayer of humble access.' 

^ Andrewes Responsio ad Bellarfninum p. 250 f. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


more prominent position restored to it in the Euchar- 
istic offices (which have sprung from the English) of the 
Scotch and American Churches. All this is true, but it 
does not amount to a denial that our Liturgy and for- 
mulas suffered in this respect from the influence of 
unguarded reaction. 

We can trace the influence of a similar reaction in the 
silence of our Church's formularies about the primitive 
practice of prayers for the blessed departed — a reaction 
in this case from the excesses of the doctrine of pur- 
gatory and indulgences. Once again a similar reaction 
has robbed us for a time of (to say the least of it) the 
immense spiritual convenience of Reservation for the 
sick, an undoubtedly primitive' practice, and of the 
apostolic practice of Unction of the sick.^ 

These are grave defects — who shall deny it ? They 
are due in part to the temper of compromise, in part, 
as we say, to the influence of reaction unrestrained by 
a satisfactory knowledge of ancient doctrine. But if 
heresy be, as it undoubtedly is, nothing short of the 
rejection of some part of the ancient heritage of truth, 
the English Church is not heretical. She has rejected 

^ The Anglican Confirmation Office is wanting in clear doctrine. 
But here we propagate (and perhaps exaggerate) an inherited de- 
fectiveness of statement which, judged by primitive standards, 
apparently characterized the mediaeval theology on this subject. 
See a pamphlet of Father Puller's ** What is the Distittctwe Grace 
of Confirmation .?" (Rivingtons.) I do not think much apology is 
needed for our restricted use of the term Sacrament, if Confirma- 
tion is regarded as completing Baptism. Rabanus Maurus reckons 
only three Sacraments though he regards Orders and Absolution 
sacramentally as the Anglican Church does. It is a question of a 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


no truth. Her divines have taught it all. It is being 
more and more completely taught within her pale to- 
day. And when we speak of defects in the teaching of 
the English Church, we must remember for our comfort 
that the English Church never made a claim to be the 
whole Church. She never claimed infallibility in her 
isolated utterances. She always appeals back behind 
herself to the Scriptures and the ancient Church. A 
part of a greater whole, she is to us only an authority, 
so far as, and because, she echoes the voice of what is 
greater than herself, the universal Church. The de- 
fectiveness of the formularies of the i6th and 17 th 
centuries (granting them to be not heretical) are no 
more to us— except in the way of temporary incon- 
venience — than the defectiveness of the formularies of 
any other particular moment of the Churches life. The 
whole Church is our mother. It is the doctrinal heri- 
tage of the whole Church that now in the days of 
completer knowledge, as the mists clear away, is 
coming out in its indissoluble coherence before the 
eyes of men, and being taught to the children of the 

In this defence of the English Church, I have frankly 
admitted all the faults of undiscipline, doctrinal com- 
promise and reaction which we think can be fairly laid 
to our Church's charge. I believe that these are to be 
set over-against the arrogant claims, the exaggerations 
of truth, the falsifications of history, the accretions of 
error, which must be laid to the charge of Rome. 
Which set of faults is the greater — which Church is 
more guilty in the eyes of God — it is not for us to deter- 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


mine, it is not our business to attempt to determine.^ 
The evils of a Church into which by God's providence 
we were new-born, granted she be a Church, are not an 
excuse for leaving her, but a spur to action. And I am 
sure that we Anglicans feel a hearty thankfulness to 
Almighty God, that He has caused our lot to be cast 
in a Church, which, however deeply she has sinned, 
can acknowledge her sins; which, however great her 
defects even in her authoritative formulas, is not pre- 
vented, by any arrogation to herself of what belongs to 
a greater whole, from confessing them and openly seek- 
ing to reform them. Better anything than to be unable 
to bear the light : better anything than to be unable to 
face the facts of history and frankly accept them : better 
any evils than to have to speak deceitfully for God. 

Further than this, however much there may be to be 
regretted and reformed in the teaching and practice of 
the Anglican Church at the present day, I must in fair- 
ness say that there is no even unauthorized practice of 
the English Church which I had not as soon be respon- 
sible for, as for that withdrawal of the chalice from the 
laity, to which the whole authority of the Church of 
Rome is committed : — that I have never heard a sermon 
in an English Church more to be regretted than one it 
was once my lot to hear in Strasburg Cathedral, in which 
Christ was preached as the revelation of Divine justice 
and Mary as the revelation of Divine love : I have not 
read in Anglican biography anything which I should 

1 Of course it is not to be forgotten that in the case of undue 
reaction the blame is divided between those who suffer themselves 
to react unrestrainedly and those who cause the reaction. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


more desire to disown than Mother Margaret Mary Hal- 
lahan's description of the Pope saying Mass :— " When 
I heard him sing Mass I cannot express what I felt : it 
was the God of earth prostrate in adoration before the 
God of heaven " ! ^ I have not been confronted in an 
Anglican book of devotion with any prayer more im- 
possible to pray than 

Soul of the Virgin, illuminate me ; 

Body of the Virgin, guard me ; 

Milk of the Virgin, feed me ; 

Passage of the Virgin, strengthen me ; 

O Mary, mother of grace, intercede for me ; 

For thy servant take me ; 

Make me always to trust in thee ; 

From all evils protect me ; 

In the hour of my death assist me ; 

And prepare for me a safe way to thee ; 

That with all the elect I may glorify thee ; 

For ever and ever. " ^ 

Thus, all things considered, we Anglicans thank God 
that He has put us elsewhere than in the Roman Church, 
though we would fain give her an ungrudging recogni- 
tion of her glories, and are very far from believing that 
all even of her educated members need be conscious of 
that temper in her modern theology which to us is so 

There is only one further remark which it seems 
desirable to make. 

It may seem to some people that the frank recog- 
nition of errors and corruptions in every part of the 

^ The Life of Mother Margaret Mary Hallahan (with a preface 
by Bishop UUathorne) p. 430. 

^ Vade Mecum piornvi sacerdotutn. Nova Editio. Campidonse, 
1865. I have translated the prayer. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Church impairs our reverence for her as a whole. If 
we are able to deny this, it is because we believe that 
the imperfections in the Church do not prevent her 
fulfilling her true function, and that our reverence for her 
is not as our reverence for Christ ; it is our reverence 
for the Bride of Christ, not yet purified — for the organ 
of the Holy Spirit, not yet perfect. The Church exists 
not yet to exhibit her glory, save to the eye of faith. 
As for that vision of the Church in her perfection of 
unity and truth and holiness, the *city which lieth 
four-square,' the * new Jerusalem descending from God 
out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her 
husband,' it is the vision of heaven but the hope of 
earth — we shall see it but not now, we shall behold it 
but not nigh. Meanwhile we have each and all of us 
all we can want to satisfy our souls with grace and 
truth, to inspire us for fresh efforts in the cause of God 
and His kingdom, to draw us out of the world into the 
communion of the saints, to fit us for the life of 
heaven. The errors of the Churches have not any 
way impaired the treasure of the catholic faith. We 
will borrow words of striking force to express our 

** At sight of this audacity,*' says the Abb^ Gratry at 
the conclusion of the second of his great letters against 
the Papal Infallibility — ** at the sight of this audacity 
and this power of falsehood introducing itself into 
theology, ... I can understand that all those who do 
not take in the whole of the questions should be seized 
with giddiness, and cry out, * What, then, can we believe 
now ? AMiat becomes of the bases of the faith ? ' 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


** I hasten to give a brief and peremptory reply to 
this objection, which, I think, will satisfy any mind, the 
most simple as well as the most learned. 

" It is, that all these falsehoods and all these frauds 
tend only to one point, a single one, and in no way to 
any other. The treasure of the Catholic Faith is here 
in no way in question. * We bear this treasure,' says 
St Paul, * in earthen vessels.' Well ! all the falsehoods 
of which I have already spoken, and all those of which 
I shall speak, affect the vessel and not the treasure. 
Our treasure is Jesus Christ, His Gospel, His real 
Presence, the Eucharist, Penance, and the Remission 
of sin ; the dogma of the Communion of the Saints, the 
visible existence of the Holy Church, our Mother ; the 
fact of eternal life, the life divine and supernatural, con- 
ferred upon souls when this life is over. This treasure 
is immaculate, entire, certain, incontestable beyond the 
reach of frauds and doubts. Fear nothing. Christian 
souls ! Feed upon the divine life, the sources of which 
are known to you. In every village of every Christian 
country, the priest of Jesus Christ holds the keys of 
the Church, into which you may enter to recline as the 
Apostle St. John did, upon the bosom of the Saviour 
Jesus, and you can ask of Him His soul, His heart. 
His blood. His mind. His divinity ; this is our treasure. 
It will not be taken from us." 

The Abbe Gratry is right. In spite of falsehoods, in 
spite of compromise, the catholic Church is still in 
every place the treasure-house of all the grace and truth 
which is the legacy of Jesus Christ to His redeemed. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Printed by 1'. and A Constablk, Printers to Her Majesty, 
at the Edinburgh University Press. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



Recent Publications 




Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Woodford's Sermons. 

Two Vols. Second Edition, Crown Bvo. 5*. eacA. Sold separately. 

By Jcunes Russell Woodford, D.D., 

Sometime Lord Bishop 0/ Ely. 


llie Feast of Tabernacles — Man's Impatience of Thin^ Supernatural — The 
Death of Moses— The Power of Christ's Presencfc in Restraining Evil— 
The Co-operation of Divine and Human Forces — The Sovereignty of God 
—The Noiseless Building of the House of God— The Power of Music— The 
Gentleness of God — The Silence of God — Man's Yearning for Safety, 
Satisfied in a Personal God — God's Use of Evil in Working out His Pur- 
poses—The Probation of Man Limited to this Life— The Arm of the Lord 
— Noah, Daniel, and Job and the Communion of Saints — The Church De> 
signed to Embrace every Age and Character— Light at Eventide. 


A City that is Set on a Hill— The Gosed Door— The Peril of Playing with 
Spiritual Convictions — Misinterpretation of the Voice of God — The Resur- 
rection Change— The Birthday of the Church— St. Peter's Shadow— The 
First Martyr— The Reign of the Son of Man— The Condition of the Dis- 
embodied Soul Imperfect— The Deposit of the Faith in Christ's Safe 
Keeping— Entrance through the Veil of Christ's Humanity— The Cloud 
of Witnesses — The Names of Individual Souls on the Breastplate of Christ 
—Absolute Obedience to the Guidance of Chrbt— The Many Crowns— The 
Rightful Entrance into the City of God. 

Paget on Belief. 

Cro^iVn Svo. 6s. 6d. 

Faculties and Difficulties for Belief and Disbelief. 
By Francis Paflret, D.D., 

Canon of Christ Churchy Oxford. 

Introductory Essay. Part I.— The Virtue of Self-assertion, in the Life of the 
Intellect— The Virtue of Self-assertion, in the Life of the Will— The Social 
Instinct— The Reasonableness of Life — The Love of Beauty in Nature — 
The Love of Beauty in Art — The Love of Beauty in Character— The Place 
of the Intellect— The Dignity of Man— Readiness. Part II.— The Need 
of Healing- The Miracle of Repair— The Reality of Grace — ^The Trans- 
formation of Pity — The Transformation of Hope — TTie Records of the Past 
— The Force of Faith— Discord and Harmony— ITie Inner Life. 

CKatctUo place, Honnoti. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Armitage — Early Church History. 

Crown Zvo. 5; . 

Sketches op Church and State in the First Eight 

By the Bev. William Armitaere, B.A., 

Vicar of Stot/ord^ Lancaster; late Scholar 0/ Emmanuel Colleze% 

Extension of the Roman Empire into Britain — Early Struggles of the Church 
with Jews and Gnostics — Heresies and Persecutions — Christian Apolo- 

?*ists-— Christianity establbhed by the State — The Arian Heresy — Growing 
ower of Roman Bishops — Gothic Invasions — Growing Corruptions in 
the Church — ^The Miracles of Saints— Northumbrian Kings — The Easter 
Controversy — General Councils — Atilla, King of the Huns — Monastic 
Institutions — Mahomet — Mahometan Conquests — Image Worship — Irish 
Missionaries— Charlemagne. 

Ottley on Revealed Truths. 

Crown Bvo, 5*. 

Rational Aspects of some Revealed Truths. 

By Edwcurd B. Ottley, M.A., 

Minister 0/ Quebec Chapel : lately the Principal 0/ Salisbury Diocesan 
Theological College. 

Introductory — Modem Doubt and Unbelief : its Extent, Origin, and 
Causes— The Authority of the Holy Scriptures— The Divinity of Christ 
(I.) : Witness of the Church, etc.— The Divinity of Christ (II.) : Witness 
of Hebrew Scriptures— The Divinity of Christ (III.^ : Witness pf the New 
Testament — Christianity and Culture. 

Mason — Christian Doctrine. 

Crffivn Svo. 7s. 6d. 

The Faith of the Gospel. A Manual of Christian Doctrine. 
By Arthur James Mason, B.D. 

Far^fterty Fettow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 

CCTatrrToo Place, Hoitton. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Liddon — Easter Sermons. 

Second Edition, Two Volt. CroTimSvo. ^. eeuk. Sold separaieiy. 

Easter in St. Paul's. Sermons bearing chiefly on the Resurrection 
of our Lord. 

By Henry Parry Liddon, D.D., D.C.L., 

CkanceUor and Canon of St. PauTt. 

Liddon — Bampton Lectures. 

Twelfth Edition. Crown Zvo. $s. 

The Divinity op our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; being 
the Bampton Lectures for 1866. 

By Henry Parry Liddon, D.D., D.C.L., 

Chanctllor and Canon of St. PauTs. 

Liddon — Elements of Religion. 

Fifth and Cheaper Edition. Small Svo, 9S. 6d. Or in Paper Cover^ is. 6d. 

Some Elements of Religion. Lent Lectures. 
By Henry Parry Liddon, D.D., D.C JU, 

Chanctllor and Canon qf St. PattTs. 
The Crown Zvo [Fourth) Edition^ 5*., tnay still be had. 

Liddon — University Sermons. 

Two Vols. Crown Zvo. ss. each. Sold separately. 

Sermons Preached before the University of Oxford. 
By Henry Parry Liddon, D.D.. D.C.L., 

Chancellor and Canon of St. PauTt. 

First Series. — 1859-1868. 
Second Series.— 1S68-1883. 

tXTttetloo Place, Honnon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Goulburn — Gospels for Sundays. 

Second Edition, Two Vols, Crown ^vo, x6*. 

Thoughts upon the Liturgical Gospels for the Sundays, 
ONE FOR each Day IN THE YEAR. With an Introduction on 
their origin, history, the modifications made in them by the 
Reformers and by the Revisers of the Prayer Book, the honour 
always paid to them in the Church, and the proportions in which 
they are drawn from the Writings of the foiu* Evangelists. 
By Edward Meyrick Ooulbum, D.D., D.C.L., 

Dean qfNonuich. 

Goulburn — Gospels for Holy Days. 

Crown 8tv. &f . 6d, 

Meditations upon the Liturgical Gospels. For the minor 
Festivals of Christ, the two first week-days of the Easter and 
Whitsun Festivals, and the Red Letter Saints' Days. To which 
is prefixed some account of the origin of Saints' Days, and their 
Evens or Vigils ; of the pruning of the Calendar of the English 
Church by the Reformers; and of the re-introduction of the 
Black-Letter Festivals, with separate notices of the Four which 
were re-introduced in the Prayer-Book of 1552. 

By Edwcurd Meyrick Qoiilbxim, D.D., D.C.L., 

Dean o/Nom/ich. 

Goulburn — Lectures in Holy Week. 

Crotvn Svo. 5J. 

Holy Week in Norwich Cathedral ; being Seven Lectures on 
the several Members of the Most Sacred Body of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. Delivered at Evensong on each Day of the Holy Week 
in the Cathedral Chturch of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of 

By Edward Meyrick Goulburn, D.D., D.C.L., 

Dean <if Norwich. 

CCTatetloo Place, Honnon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Welldon's Harrow Sermons. 

Second Edition. Crown Bvo. -js. td. 

The Future and the Past : Sermons Preached to Harrow Boys. 
ist Series, 1885 and 1886. 

By the Bev. J. B. O. Welldon, M.A., 
Head Master of Harrow SckooL 

The Future and the Past— Individuality— All Saints* Day— The Religious 
Value of Small Duties— The Promise of the Advent— The Bible— The 
Meetings with the Angels — The Sins of the Tongue — The Bearing of 
the Cross— Worldliness— The Keeping of Sunday— The Natural Body 
and the Spiritual Body— Balaam— The Animal World— The Blessing of 
Failure — Friendships— Spiritual Insight— The Lord's Prayer— The Uses 
of the Holidays. 

The Altar Book. 

With Rubrics in Red. Large Type, Royal Zvo. los. td. 

The Order of the Administration op the Holy Communion, 
AND THE Form of Solemnization of Matrimony, according 
to the Use of the Church of England. 

May also be had bound in Morocco. 

Knox Litde — Hopes of the Passion. 

Crown Bvo. 3*. 6d. 

The Hopes and Decisions of the Passion op our Most 
Holy Redeemer. 

By the Bev. W. J. Knox Little, M.A., 

Canon Residentiary oflVortester, and Vicar of Hoar Cross, BurtoH-on-TreHL 

CHatetloo Place, Honoon* 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Woodford — The Great Commission. 

Second Edition. Crown %vo. 5*. 

The Great Commission. Twelve Addresses on the Ordinal. 

By James Russell Woodford, D.D., 

Sometime Lord Bishop of Ely. 

Edited, with an Introduction on the Ordinations of his Episcopate, 
By Herbert Mortimer Luckock, D.D., 

One o/his Examininsr Chaplains. 

Luckock — The Bishops in the Tower. 

Second Edition. Crown Bvo. 6s. 

The Bishops in the Tower. A Record of Stirring Events affecting 
the Church and Nonconformists from the Restoration to the 

By Herbert Mortimer Luckock, D.D., 

Canon of Ely, etc. 

The Book of Church Law. 

Fifth Edition^ revised. Crozvn Szfo. 7*. 6d. 

The Book op Church Law : bemg an Exposition of the Legal 
Rights and Duties of the Parochial Clergy and the Laity of the 
Church of England. 

By the late Rev. John Henry Blunt, D.I>., 
Revised by Sir Walter Q. F. PhiUimore, Bart., D.C.L., 

Barrister-at'Law, and Chancellor of the Diocese qf Lincoln. 

CtETstetloo placf, ]l<rttDon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Holland — Creed and Character. 

Second Bdition. Crown Bvo. ys. 6d. 

Creed and Character. A Volume of Sennons. 
By the Rev. H. 8. Holland, M.A., 

Canon ami Precentor of St. PmuPs. 

The Story of an Apostle's Faith— The Rock ; The Secret ; The Fellowship : 
The Witness ; The Resources ; The Mind ; The Ministry of the Church— 
The Solidarity of Salvation— The Freedom of Salvation— The Gift of Grace 
—The Law of Forgiveness— The Coming of the Spirit— The Beauty of Holi- 
ness—The Energy of Unselfishness— The Fruit of the Spirit— Thanksgiving— 
The Activity of Service — Character and Circumstance. 

Holland — Logic and Life. 

Third Edition. Crown Zvo. 7*. td. 

Logic and Life, with other Sennons. 
By the Bev. H. 8. Holland, M.A., 

Canon and Precentor of St, PauFt, 

* Some or diese sennoas are as powerful spiritual feeling and Judnnent, speaking ia 
as any preached in this generation, and. in- language brilliant, fordole, copious, riang 
deed. tuU of genius, ordinal thought, and often to splendour and magnificence,'— 
spiritual veracity. Of the three first, it Church Quarterly Review. 

would be hard to speak in terms too high/— ' The sermons are thoughtful, earnest, and 

Spectator. often eloquent and powerful They fully 

* These [two last-namedl sermons exhibit bear out the high reputation Mr. Holland 
at the full the real greatness of Mr. Holland's has obtained as a preacher of consideraUe 
power— his originality, his insight, his range acceptableness and influence with hearers 
of experience, observation, and sympathies ; of education and culture.'— CMarkiuzM. 
and, above all, his never-failing elevation of 

Holland — Good Friday Addresses. 

Small Zvo. 2s. 

Good Friday : being Addresses on the Seven Last Words, delivered 
•at St. Paul's Cathedral, on Good Friday 1884. 

By the Bev. H. 8. Holland, M.A., 

Canon and Precentor <tfSt. PauTx, 

(QKaterloo Place, Eonoon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Holland — Christ or Ecclesiastes. 

Crown %vo. 3X. 6d. 

Christ or Ecclesiastes. Sermons preached at St. Paul's 

By Henry Scott Holland, M.A., 

Canon and Prectntor o/St, Paul's. 

Crake — Chronicles of ^Escendune, etc. 

Crown Zvo. 3X. 6d. each. Sold separately. 

By the Bev. A. D. Crake. B.A., 

Author ^the ' /history </'/A« Church under the Roman Empire,* etc., etc 

Edwy the Fair ; OR, The First Chronicle of ^Escendune. 
A Tale of the Days of St. Dunstan. 

Alfgar the Dane ; or. The Second Chronicle of ^Escendune. 
A Tale of the Days of Edmund Ironside. 

The Rival Heirs ; being the Third and Last Chronicle 


The House of Walderne : A Tale of the Cloister and the Forest 
in the Days of the Barons' Wars. 

Brian Fitz-Count : A Story of WalUngford Castle and Dorchester 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Mozley on the Old Testament. 

Third Edition. %vo. xos. 6d. 

Ruling Ideas in Early Ages and their Relation to Old 
Testament Faith. Lectures delivered to Graduates of the 
University of Oxford. 

By J. B. Mozley, D.D., 

Late Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Projessor of Divinity in the 
University 0/ Oxford. 


Abraham—Sacrifice of Isaac— Human Sacrifices— Exterminating Wars— Visita* 
tion of the Sins of Fathers upon Children— Jael — Connection of Jael's Act with 
the Morality of her Age — Law of Retaliation— Retaliation : Law of Go€l— The 
End the Test of a Progressive Revelation— The Manichaeans and the Jewish 

Mozley s University Sermons. 

Fifth Edition. Crown Svo. js. 6d. 

Sermons Preached before the University of Oxford and on 
Various Ocxiasions. 

By J. B. Mozley, DJD„ 

Late Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Professor of Divinity^ 0>ford, 


The Roman Council— The Pharisees— Eternal Life— The Reversal of Human 
Judgment— War— Nature— The Work of the Spirit on the Natural Man— Thf 
Atonement— Our Duty to Equals— The Peaceful Temper— The Strength of 
Wishes— The Unspoken Judgment of Mankind— The True Test of Spu-hual 
Birth— Ascension Day — Gratitude — The Principle of Emulation — Religion the 
First Choice— The Influence of Dogmatic Teaching on Education. 

CUttterloa Place, ILouDon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Mozley's Essays. 

Second Edition, Two Vols. Zvo. 241. 

Essays, Historical and Theological. 
By J. B. Mozley, D.D.. 

LaU Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Professor <i/ Divinity in the 
University 0/ Oxford. 

VoLUMB I. — Introduction and Memoir of the Anthor— Lord Strafford— Arch- 
bishop Laud — Carlyle's Cromwell — Luther. 
Volume II.— Dr. Arnold— Blanco White— Dr. Pusey's Sermon— The Book of 
Job^Maurice't Theological Essays— Indian Conversion— The Argument of 
I)esign — The Princij^le of Causation considered in opposition to Atheistic 
Theories— In Memonam — The Author's Articles and Worlcs. 

Mozley on Miracles. 

Seventh Edition. Crown Zvo, js. 6d, 
Eight Lectures on Miracles: being the Bampton Lectures 
for 1865. 

By J. B. Mozley. D.D.. 

Late Canon ^Christ Church, and Re^rius Professor 0/ Divinity in the 
Vnivers^y ^fO:tford. 

Mozley's Parochial Sermons. 

Third Edition. Crown Zvo, js. 6d. 

Sermons, Parochial and Occasional. 
By J. B. Mozley, D.D., 

Late Canon of Christ Church, and Regitts Prtffessor qf Divinity in the 
University <tf03^ord. 

The Right Eye and the Right Hand— Temptation treated as Opportunity— The 
Influences of Habit on Devotion— Thought for the Morrow— The Relief of 
Utterance — Seeking a Sign— David Numbering the People — The Heroism erf" 
Faith— Proverbs — The Teaching of Events— Growing Worse — Our Lord the 
Sacrifice for Sin — The Parable of the Sower— The Religious Enjoyment of 
Nature— The Threefold Office of the Holy Spirit— Wisdom and Folly Tested by 
Experience — Moses, a Leader — The Unjust Steward — Sowing to the Spirit- 
True Religion, a Manifestation — St. Paul's Exaltation of Labour— Jeremiah's 
Witness against Idolatry — Isaiah's Estimate of Worldly Greatness — The Short- 
ness of Life— The Endless State of Being— The Witness of the Apostles— Life 
a Probation — Christian Mysteries, the Common Heritage — Our Lord's Hour- 
Fear — The Educating Power of Strong Impressions — The Secret Justice of 
Temporal Providence— Jacob as a Prince Prevailing with God. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Mozley's Lectures. 

Zvo. los. 6d. 

Lectures and other Theological Papers. 
By J. B. Mozley, D.D., 

Late Can0tt 0/ Christ Church, and Regius Professor 0/ Divinity in th* 
University o/Ox/ord, 

The Prayer Book in Latin. 

With Rubrics in Red. Small Zvo. 7*. td. 

Liber Precum Publicarum Ecclesls ANGLiCANis. 
A Qulielmo Bright, S.T.P.» 

^dis Christi a^ud Oxon. Canonico, Historim BccUsiastiae, Pr^essore Regio, 

Petro Qoldsznith Medd, A.M., 

CoUegii Univertitatis apud Oxon. \Socio Seniore. 

Latine redditus. Editio Tenia, cum Appendice. 

(In hac Editione continentur Versiones Latlnae— x. Libri Precum Publicarum 
Ecclesia AngUcanae ; 3. Liturgiae Primae Reformatae ; 3. Liturgiae Scoticanse ; 
4. Liturgiae Americanae.] 

Blunt — Household Theology. 

New Edition. Small Zvo. 3*. 6d. 

Household Theology : a Handbook of Keligious Information re- 
specting the Holy Bible, the Prayer Book, the Church, the 
Ministry, Divine Worship, the Creeds, etc. , etc. 

By the Bev. John Henry Blunt, D.D., 

Editor (if the * Annotated Book c/" Common Prayer, etc., etc 
Also a Cheap Edition, i6mo. is. 

CDaterloo Plirce, Honnon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Selections from Liddon's Writings. 

New Edition. Crown Bvo. 3*. 6d. 

Selections from the Writings of H. P. Liddon, D.D., D.C.L., 

Chancellor and Canon of St. PauTs. 

Selections from Keble's Writings. 

Crown Zvo, 3*. 6d. 

Selections from the Writings of John Keble, M.A., 

Author of 'Th* Christian Year* 

Selections from Pusey's Writings. 

Third Edition. Crown Svo. 3*. 6d. 
Selections from the Writings of Edward Bouverie Pusey, D.D., 

Late Regius Prq/uror ^Hebrew, and Canon ^Christ Church, Oxford. 

Selections from Neale s Writings. 

New Edition. Crorvn Zvo. 3s. 6d. 

Selections from the Writings of John Mason Neale, D.D., 

Late Warden ttfSackvUie College. 

GKatetloo Place, Honoon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Life of Bishop Bickersteth. 

With Portrait. %vo. laj. 

A Sketch of the Life and Episcopate of the Right Rev. 
Robert Bickersteth, D. D. , Bishop of Ripon, 1857-1884. With 
a Preface by the Lord Bishop of Exeter. 

By his Son, Montagru Cyril Bickersteth, M.A., 

Vicar of St. PauCs^ Pudsey^ Leeds. 

Williams on the Catechism. 

New Edition. Two Vols. Crown ^vo. 5*. each. Sold separately. 

Plain, Sermons on the Catechism. 
By the Bev. Isaac Williams, B.D., 

Latt FeUow 0/ Trinity Collee'e, Oxford; Author of a * Devotional Co*nmentary 
Oft the Gospel Narrative.' 

Bickersteth — Yesterday, To-day, and 
For Ever. 

One Shilling Edition, iStno. 
IVith Red Borders. j6mo. 9S. 6d.- 

Yesterday, To-day, and For Ever : a Poem in Twelve Boolcs. 
By Edward Henry Bickersteth, D.D., 

Siskofi of Exeter. 
The Larger Edition^ ss., may be had. 

Baker — Prayers for Boys. 

yinto. Bd. 

Daily Praybrs for Younger Boys. 
By William Baker, D.D. 

I/ead A faster ^Merchant Taylors^ School, and Prtbendary of St. PauPs. 

CKatetloo pitce, Honnoit. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


The Annotated Prayer Book. 

In One Volume, Quarto., £,\y\5. 
Or Half-bound in Morocco. £i, iis. 6d. 

The Annotated Book of Common Prayer : being an Historical, 
Ritual, and Theological Commentary on the Devotional System 
of the Church of England. 

Edited by the ReV. John Henry Biant, D.D., P.S.A. 

The reception which the Annotated Book of Common Prayer has met with 
during an issue of eight editions in sixteen years has led the publishers to 
believe that a new edition, carefully revised and enlarged, in accordance with 
our advanced knowledge, would be acceptable. The present edition has 
therefore been prepared with, among others, the following improvements : — 
1. A thoroughly trustworthy text of the whole Prayer Book, such as has 
not hitherto been accessible. 

3. A much enlarged Introduction, embracing in a compact form all that is 
now known respecting the history of the Prayer Book. 

3. The Epistles and Gospels, with all other portions of Holy Scripture, are 

now printed at length. 

4. The Notes on the Minor Saints' Days have been carefully revised, and 

in most cases re-written. 

Thomas-k-Kempis' Of the Imitation 
of Christ. 

Large Type Edition. Crown %vo. 3*. dd. 

Of the Imitation of Christ. In Four Books. 

By Thomas h, Kempia 

Translated and Edited by the Rev. W. H. Hutchingrs, M.A., 

Rector 0/ Kirkhy Misferton, Yorkshire. 

CEtaUtlao piirce, Eonnoit. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Luckock on the Prayer Book. 

Second Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Studies in the History of the Book of Common Prayer. 
The Anglican Reform — THe Puritan Innovations — The Eliza- 
bethan Reaction — The Caroline Settlement. With Appendices. 

By Herbert Mortimer Luckock, "DJD,, 

Canon of Ely, etc. 

'This able and helpful book— recom- arran)?ed volume is a valuable contribution 

mendinsr it emphatically to all educated to liturgn'cal history, which will prove in- 

memliers of the entire Anglican community.' teresting to all readers and almost indispen« 

—Church Quarterly Review. sable to the theological student who has to 

' We heartily commend this very interest- master the history and rationale of the 

ing and very readable book.'— d«ar<^tan. Book of Common fray ex. '—Notes and 

*Dr. Luckock's compact and clearly Queries. 

Knox Little — Mystery of the Passion. 

Third Edition. Crown Svo. y. 6d, 

The Mystery of the Passion op our Most Holy Redeemer. 
By the Rev. W. J. Knoz Little. M.A., 

Canon Residentiary of Worcester and Vicar of Hoar Cross. 

The Treasury of Devotion. 

Fifteenth Edition. iSmo, 2s. 6d. ; doth litnp^ 2*. ; or bound with the 
Book 0/ Common Prayer^ 35. 6d. 

The Treasury of Devotion : a Manual of Prayers for General and 
Daily Use. 

Compiled by a Priest. 
Edited by the Bev. T. T. Carter, M.A. 

A Iso an Edition in Large Type. Crown Svo. 5s. 

CETaterloo Place, Hontioit. rxi. 88 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Williams — Female Scripture Characters. 

New Edition. Crown Svo. 5*. 

Female Characters of Holy Scripture. A Series of Sermons. 
By tne Rev. Isaac Williams, B.D.. 

Formerly Fellow q/ Trinity Collese, Oxford. 


Eve— Sarah— Lot's Wife— Rebekah— Leah and Rachel— Miriam— Rahab— 
Deborah— Ruth— Hannah— The Witch of Endor— Bathsheba— Rizpah- The 
Queen of Sheba— The Widow of Zarephath— Jezebel— The Shunammite— 
Esther— Elisabeth — Anna — The Woman of Samaria — Joanna — The Woman 
with the Issue of Blood— The Woman of Canaan— Martha— Mar>'— Salome 
—The Wife of Pilate— Dorcas— The Blessed Virgin. 

Mercier — The Story of Salvation. 

Small Bvo. 3*. 6ri. 

The Story of Salvation ; or, Thoughts on the Historic Study 
of the Bible. 

By Mrs. Jerome Mercier, 

Attthcr of* Our Mother Church,' etc. 

Body — The Life of Temptation. 

Sixth Edition. Crown Zvo. ^s. 6d. 

The Life of Temptation. A Course of Lectures delivered in sub- 
stance at St. Peter's, Eaton Square ; also at All Saints', Margaret 

By the Rev. Georsre Body, D.D., 

Canon oj Durham. 

The Leading into Temptation— The Rationale of Temptation— Why we are 
Tempted— Safety in Temptation— With Jesus in Temptation— The End of 

QEratetloo Place, llonl^oit. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Knox Litdc's Manchester Sermons. 

Second Edition. Crovjn Zvo. js, 6d, 

Sermons Preached for the most part in Manchester. 
By the Bev. W. J. Knox Little, M«A*, 

Canon Residentiary of Worcester, and Vicar of Hoar Cross. 


The Soul instructed by God— The Claim of God upon the Soul^Thc Super- 
natural Powers of the Soul— The Soul in its Inner Life — ^The Soul in the World 
and at the Judgment — The Law of Preparation — The Principle of Preparation 
—The Temper of Preparation— The Energy of Preparation— The Soul s Need 
and God's Nature— The Martyr of Jesus— The Secret of Prophetic Power— The 
Law of Sacrifioe— The Comfort of God— The Symbolism of the Cross— The 
Beatitude of Mary, the Mother of the Lord. 

Knox Little — The Christian Life. 

Third Edition. Crown Zvo. 34. 6d. 

Characteristics and Motives of the Christian Life. Ten 
Sermons preached in Manchester Cathedral in Lent and Advent 

By the Bev. W. J. Knox Little, M.A., 

Canon Residentiary 0/ irorcester, and Vicar 1^ Hoar Cross. 


Christian Work— Christian Advance— Christian Watching— Christian Battle 
Christian Suffering— Christian Joy— For the Love of Man— For the sake 
Jesus— For the Glory of God— The Claims of Christ. 

Knox Little — The Witness of the Passion. 

Second Edition. Crown Zvo. y. 6d 

The Witness op the Passion of our Most Holy Redeemer. 
By the Rev. W. J. Knox Little, M.A.. 

Canon Residentiary 0/ Worcester, and Vicar ^ Hoar Cross. 

n$ttxUo pia^e, HonQofV. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Williams's Devotional Commentary. 

New Edition. Eight Vols. Crown ^vo, f,s,each. Sold separately, 

A Devotional Commentary on the Gospel Narrative. 
By tbe Rev. Isacic Williams, B.D., 

Formerly Fellow of Trinity ColUstt Ox/ord, 









Voices of Comfort. 

New Edition. Crown Svo. ys. 6d. 

Voices of Comfort. 
Edited by the Rev. Thomas Vincent Posbery. M«A^ 

Sometime yicar of St. GiUs's, Oi^ord. 

This Volume of prose and poetry,^ original and selected, aims at revealing 
the fountains of hope and joy which underlie the griefs and sorrows of life. 
It is so divided as to afford readings for a month. The keynote of each day is 

S'ven to the title prefixed to it, such as : ' The Power of the Cross of Christ, 
ay 6. Conflicts of the Soul, Day 17. The Communion of Saints, Day 20. 
The Comforter, Day 22. The Light of Hope, Day 25. The Coming of Christ, 
Day 28.' Each day begins with passages of Holy Scripture. These are fol- 
lowed by articles in prose, which are succeeded by one or more short prayers. 
After these are poems or i)assages of poetry, and then very brief extracts in 
prose or verse close the section. The book is meant to meet, not merely cases 
of bereavement or physical suffering, but 'to minister specially to the hidden 
troubles of the heart, as^ they are silently weaving their dark threads into the 
web of the seemingly brightest life.' 

Also a Cheap Edition. Stnall 9vo. y. 6d. 

CElatetloo jplace, HonQon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


The Star of Childhood. 

Fourth Edition. Royal i6tuo. 2S. 6d, 

The Star of Childhood : a First Book of Prayers and Instruction 
for Children. 

Compiled by a Priest. 
Edited by the Rev. T. T. Carter. M«A- 

IVitA Illustratiotis after Fra Angelico. 

The Guide to Heaven. 

New Edition. iBmo. is. 6d. ; C/otA limp, is. 

The Guide to Heaven : a Book of Prayers for every Want. For 
the Working Classes. 

Compiled by a Priest. 
Edited by the Rev. T. T. Carter, M.A. 

An Edition in Large Type. Crown Zvo. xs. 6d.; Cloth limp, xs. 

For Days and Years. 

N^w Edition. iSnio. 2S. 6d. 

For Days and Years. A Book containing a Text, Short Reading, 

and Hymn for Every Day in the Church's Year. 

Selected by H. L. Sidney Lear. 

Also a Cheap Edition, S2tno, is.; or Cloth gilt, xs. 6d. 

WilKams on the Epistles and Gospels. 

New Edition. Two Vols. Crowfi Zvo. 5*. each. 
Sold separately. 

Sermons on the Epistles and Gospels for the Sundays 
AND Holy Days throughout the Year. 

By the Rev. Isaac Williams, B.D., 

Author </*« ' Dtvotiotial Commentary on the Cosset Narrative.' 

CDiitetUo place, Honiion. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Moberly's Parochial Sermons. 

Crown Zvo, 7s. 6d. 

Parochial Sermons, chiefly preached at Brighstone, Isle of Wight. 

By Oeorsre Moberly, D.C.Ii., 

Lafe Bishop ^Salisbury. 


The Night is far spent, the Day is at hand— Elijah, the Warner of the 
Second Advent of the Lord— Christmas — Epiphany — The Rich Man and 
Lazarus — The Seventh Day Rest — I will arise and go to my Father— Con- 
firmation, a Revival— Korah — The Law of Liberty — Buried with Him in 
Baptism— The Waiting Church of the Hundred and Twenty— Whitsun Dajf. 
I will not leave you comfortless — Whitsun Day. Walking after the Spirit 
— The Barren Fig Tree — Depart from me ; for I am a sinful man, O Lord — 
Feeding the Four Thousand — We are debtors— He that thtnketh he standeth 
— ^llie Strength of Working Prayer — Elijah's Sacrifice — If thou hadst known, 
even thou — Harvest Thanksgiving — Tonadab, the Son of Rechab— The Trans- 
figuration; Death and Glory— Welcome to Everlasting Habitations— The 
Question of the Sadducees. 

Moberly's Plain Sermons. 

Ne^v Edition. Crown Svo. 5s. 

Plain Sermons, Preached at Brighstone. 
By Oeorsre Moberly, D.O.Ij., 

Late Bishop of Salisbury. 

Except a man be bom again— The Lord with the Doctors— The Draw-Net— I 
will lay me down in peace — Ye have not so learned Christ — Trinity Sunday — 
My Flesh is Meat indeed — ^The Com of Wheat dying and multiplied — The Seed 
Com springing to new life— I am the Way, the Imth, and the Life — The Ruler 
of the Sea— SteM-ards of the Mysteries of God— Ephphatha— The Widow of 
Nain— Josiah's discovery of the Law — The Invisible World : Angels — Prayers, 
especially Daily Prayers — They all with one consent began to make excuse — 
Ascension Day — The Comforter — The Tokens of the Spirit — Elijah's Warning, 
Fathers and Children— Thou shalt see them no more for ever— Baskets full of 
fragments— Harvest— The Marriage Supper of the Lamb— The Last Judgment. 

CDatetloo Place, ILtttQon. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Luckock — Footprints of the Son of Man. 

Third Edition. Two Vols. Crown Zvo. 12s. 

Footprints of the Son of Man as traced by Saint Mark : 
being Eighty Portions for Private Study, Family Reading, and 
Instructions in Church. 

By Herbert Mortimer Luckock, D.D^ 

CauoH o/Ely, tie. 

With an Introduction by the late Bishop of Ely. 

Goulburn — Thoughts on Personal Religion. 

AVw Edition. Small Zvo. 6s. 6d. 

Thoughts on Personal Religion : being a Treatise on the 
Christian Life in its two Chief Elements — Devotion and Practice. 

By Edward Mejnick Ooulbum, D.D., D.C.L., 

Dtan 0/ Norwich. 

Also a Cheap Edition. 3*. 6d. 

Presentation Edition^ elegantly printed on Tontd Paper. 

Two Vols. Small Svo. tos. 6d. 

Goulburn — The Pursuit of Holiness. 

Sevt'nth Edition. Small Svo. 5^. 

The Pursuit of Holiness: a Sequel to 'Thoughts on Personal 
Religion,' intended to carry the Reader somewhat farther onward 
in the Spiritual Life. 

By Edweurd Mejnilck Goulburn. D.D., D.C.L., 

iXean 0/ Norwich. 
Also a Cheap Edition, y. 6d. 

CKaterToo Place, Hontioii. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Goulburn on the Lord*s Supper. 

Sixth Edition. Small Zvo. 6j. 

A Commentary, Expository and Devotional, on the Order of th« 
Administration of the Lord's Supper, according to the Use of the 
Church of England ; to which is added an Appendix on Fasting 
Communion, Non-comniunicating Attendance, Auricular Confes- 
sion, the Doctrine of Sacrifice, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice. 

By Edward Meyrick Goulburn, D.D., D.C.L^ 

Dean of Norwich. 

Also a Clieap Edition^ nni/orm with ' Thoughts on Personal Religion ^ 
and ' The Pursuit o/ Holiness* 3*. td. 

S. Augustine's Confessions. 

Cheap Edition. tSmo. 2s. 6d. 
Also with Red Borders. Small Zvo. ss. 

The Confesmons of S. Augustine. In Ten Books. 
Translated and Edited, 

By the Rev. W. H. Hutchingrs, M.A., 

Rector of Kirkby Misperton, Yorkshire. 

Swayne — The Blessed Dead. 

Crown Zv0. 3J. 6d. 

The Blessed Dead in Paradise : Four All Saints' Day Sermons, 
preached in Salisbury Cathedral. 

By Robert G. Swayne, M.A., 

Chamxltor and Canon Residentiary. 

CDatetloo JPIace, Honnoti* 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Goulburn — The Collects of the Day. 

Third Edition. Two Vols. Crown Svo. %s. each. Sold separately. 

The Collects of the Day : an Exposition, Critical and Devotional, 
of the Collects appointed at the Communion. With Preliminary 
Essays on their Structure, Sources, and General Character, and 
Appendices containing Expositions of the Discarded Collects of 
the First Prayer Book of 1549, and of the Collects of Morning 
and Evening Prayer. 

By Edward Mesnick Ooulburn, D.D., D.C.L., 

Dean of Ncr-wich. 

VoLUMB I. Book I. Introductory. — On the Excellences of the Collects -On 
the Oriein of the word Collect— On the Structure of a Collect, as illustrated by 
the Collect in the Burial Service— Of the Sources of the Collects : Of the Sacra- 
mentary of Leo, of the Sactamentary of Gelasius, of Gregory the Great and his 
Sacramentary, of the Use of Sarum, and of S. Osmund its Compiler— On the 
Collects of Archbishop Cranmer— Of the Restoration Collects, and of John 
Cosin, Prince-Bishop of Durham — Of the Collects, as representing the Gemus of 
the English Church. Book II. Vsatl.^The Constant Collect. Partll.— CtfA 
Ucts varying with the Ecclesiastical Season^Advtnt to Whitsunday. 

Volume II. Book II. contd,—Txiaity Sunday to All Saints* Day. Book III. 
—On. the Collects after the Offertory. Appendix K.— Collects in the First 
Reformed Prayer Book of 1540 which were suppressed in 155a — The Collect 
for the First Communion on Christmas Day — The Collect for S. Mary Mag- 
dalene's Day (July aa). Appendix ^.—Exposition of the Collects of Morning 
and Evening Prayer^— Thit Second at Morning Prayer, for Peace— The Third 
at Morning Prayer, for Grace — ^The Second at Evening Prayer, for Peace— 
The Third at Evening Prayer, for Aid against all Perils. 

Knox Little — Good Friday Addresses. 

New Edition, Small Bvo. 2*. ; or in Paper Cover^ is. 

The Three Hours' Agony of Our Blessed Redeemer : being 
Addresses in the form of Meditations delivered in S. Alban's 
Church, Manchester, on Good Friday 1877. 

By the Bev. W. J. Knox Little, M.A., 

Canon Residentiary 0/ IVorcester, and Vicar 0/ Hoar Cross. 

matetloo Place, HottO^n* 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Luckock — After Death. 

Sixth, Edition. Crown %vo. 6*. 

After Death. An Examination of the Testimony of Primitive 
Times respecting the State of the Faithful Dead, and their rela- 
tionship to the Living. 

By Herbert Mortimer Luckock, D.D., 

Canon of Ely, etc. 


Part I.—The Test of Catholicity—The Value of the Testimony of the Primi- 
tive Fathers— The Intermediate State— Change in the Intermediate State — 
Prayers for the Dead : Reasons for Our LorcTs Silence on the Subject— The 
Testimony of Holy Scripture— The Testimony of the Catacombs— The Testi- 
mony of the Early Fathers— The Testimony of the Primitive Liturgies — 
Prayers for the Pardon of Sins of Infirmity, and the Effacement of Sinful 
Stains— The Inefficacy of Prayer for those who died in wilful imrepented Sin. 

Part II.— Primitive Testimony to the Intercession of the Saints— Primitive 
Testimony to the Invocation of the Saints— The Trustworthiness of the Patristic 
Evidence for Invocation tested — The Primitive Liturgies and the Roman Cata- 
combs — Patristic Opinions on the Extent of the Knowledge possessed by the 
Saints— The Testimonv of Holy Scripture upon the same Subject— The Beatific 
Vision not ^et attained by any of the Saints — Conclusions drawn from the fore- 
going Testimony. 

Supplementary Chapters.— (a.) Is a fuller Recognition of the Practice of 
Praying for the Dead desirable or not?— (3.) Is it la^mil or desirable to practise 
Invocation of Saints in any form or not?— Table of Fathers, Councils, etc.— 
Passages of Scripture explained or quoted— Geneml Index. 

S. Bonaventure's Life of Christ 

Crown Svo. js. 6d. 

The Life of Christ. 

By S. Bonaventure. 
Translated and Edited by the Bev. W. H. Hutchiners, 

Rector of Kirkby Misperton, Yorkshire. 

• The wh<^ volume is full of gems and seek food for their daily meditaHons, we can 
rich veins of thought, and whether as a com- scarcely imagine a more accepuble book.' 
panion to the preacher or to those yrho —Literary Churchman. 

CKntetioo JPIftte, Honoon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Selection from Newman's Sermons. 

Third Edition. Crown Bvo. s*. 

Selection, adapted to the Seasons of the Ecclesiastical Year, from 
the ' Parochial and Plain Sermons ' of John Henry Newman, 
B.D., sometime Vicar of S. Mary's, Oxford. 

Edited by the Bev. W. J. Copeland, B.D., 

Lnff Rector 0/ Famham, Essex. 

Advonti—^A^-AtxivaX the Tost of Religioi|S Earnestness—Divine Calls— The 
Ventures of Faith— Watching. Christmas Day .'—Religious Joy. New Year's 
Sunday ;— The Lapse of Time. Epiphany .—Remembrance of Past Mercies- 
Equanimity— The Immortality of the Soul — Christbn Manhood— Sincerity and 
Hypocrisy — Christian Sympathy. 5'<'//«a^(?*/»f« ;— Present Blessings. Sexa- 
^esima: — Endurance, the Christian's Portion. Quinquagesima: — Love, the One 
Thing Needful. Z^«/r— The Individuality of the Soul— Life the Season of 
Repentance— Bodily Suffering— Tears of Christ at the Grave of Lazarus- 
Christ's Privations a Meditation for Christmas— The Cross of Christ the Measure 
of the World. Good Friday : — The Crucifixion. Easter Day : — Keeping Fast 
and Festival. Easter-Tide :^Witnessts of the Resurrection— A Particular 
Providence as Revealed in the Gospel— Christ Manifested in Remembrance— 
The I n visible World— Waiting for Christ. A scension ;— Warfare the Condition 
of Victory. Sunday after Ascension'.— ^v&xaz with Christ. Whitsunday:—' 
The Weapons of Saints. Trinity Sunday:— The Mysterionsness of our Pre- 
sent Being. Sundays after Trinity :— Holiness Necessary for Future Blessed- 
ness—The Religious Use of Excited Feelings— The Self-wise Inquirer— Scrip- 
ture a Record of Human Sorrow— The Danger of Riches— Obedience without 
Love as instanced in the Character of Balaam— Moral Consequences of Single 
Sins— The Greatness and Littleness of Human Life— Moral Effects of Com- 
munion with God— The Thought of God the Stay of the Soul— The Power of 
the Will— The Gospel Palaces— Religion a Weariness to the Natural Man— The 
World our Enemy— The Praise of Men— Religion Pleasant to the Religious- 
Mental Prayer— Curiosity a Temptation to Sin — Miracles no Remedy for Un- 
belief—Jeremiah, a Lesson for the Disappointed— The Shepherd of our Souls 
— ^Doing Glory to God in Pursuits of the World. 

QRamloQ piste, Hoitnott. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Jennings — Ecclesia Anglicana. 

Crown Zvo. js. 6d. 

Ecclesia Anglicana. A History of the Church of Christ in 
England, from the Earliest to the Present Times. 

By the Rev. Arthur Charles Jenniners, M.A., 

yesus College, Cambridge, sometime Tyrwhitt Scholar, Crosse Scholar, Hebrew 

University Prixetnan, Fry Scholar of S. yohn's College, Carus and 

Scholefield Pritteman, and Rector nf King's Stanley, 

Bickersteth — The Lord's Table. 

Second Edition. i6mo. \s. ; or Cloth extra, 2S. 

The Lord's Table ; or, Meditations on the Holy Communion Office 
in the Book of Common Prayer. 

By E. H. Bickersteth, D.D., 

BisIiof< of ExeUr. 

•We must draw our reriew to an end, and sincere thanks to Mr. Bickersteth for 
without using any more of our own words, this TOodly and profitable "Companion to 
except one partins^ expression of cordial the Communion Service." '—Record, 

Manuals of Religious Instruction. 

New and Revised Editions. Small %vo. y. 6d. each. Sold separately. 

Manuals of Religious Instruction. 
Edited by John Pilkingrton Norris, D.D., 

Archdeacon of Bristol and Canon Residentiary qf Bristol Cathedral. 

I. The Catechism and Prayer Book. 
II. The Old Testament. 
III. The New Testament. 

CCtaterloo Place, Honoott. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Aids to the Inner Life. 

Five Voh. '^'zmCt Cloth lim^, 6d. each : or Cloth extra, is. each. 
Sold separately. 

Theu Five Volumes^ Cloth extra, may be had in a Box, price js. 
Also an Edition with Red Borders, os. each. 

Aids to the Inner Life. 
Edited by the Bev. W. H. Hutcblngrs, M. A., 

Rector qf Kirkby Misperton, Yorkshire. 

l*hese books form a series of works provided for the use of members of the 
English Charch. The process of adaptation is not left to the reader, bat has 
been undertaken with the view of bringing every expression, as far as possible, 
into harmony with the Book of Common Prayer and Anglican Divinity. 

Rem PIS. 

THE CHRISTIAN YEAR. Thoughts in Verse for the Sundays and Holy 
Days throughout the Year. 

Francis db Sales, Bbhop and Prince of Geneva. 

THE HIDDEN LIFE OF THE SOUL. From the French of Jean Nicolas 

THE SPIRITUAL COMBAT. Together with the Supplement and the Path 
of Paradise. By Laurence Scupoli. 

'We bearttty wish success to thu im* venient for common use. The price at 

portant series, and trust it may command an which the volumes are produced is marvd^ 

extensive sale. We are much struck, not lously low. It may be hoped that a large 

only \iy the excellent manner in which the circulation will secure from loss those who 

design has been carried out In the Transla> have undertaken this scheme for diflTusinff 

tions themselves, but also by the way in far and wide such valtiable means of 

which Messrs. Kivington have done their advancing and deepening, after so high a 

part. The type and sue of the volumes are standard, the spurituaT Vi^— Literary 

precisely what will be found most con> Churthman. 

Blunt — Theological Dictionary. 

Second Edition. Imperial Zvo. 42*. : orin half-morocco, lis. 6d. 

Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology. 

By Various Writers. 

Edited by the Rev. John Henry Blunt, D.D., 

Editor 0/the • Annotated Book <tf Common Prayer,' etc., etc. 

QSamloQ PUce, HonQon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Norris — Rudiments of Theology. 

second Edit ion y revised. Crmvn Zvo. 7*. td. 

Rudiments op Theology. A First Book for Students. 
By Jolin PUkinfiTton Norris, D.D., 

Archdeacon qf Bristol, and Canon Residentiary 0/ Bristol Cathedral. 


Part I.— Fundamental Doctrines :— The Doctrine of God's Existence— The 
Doctrine of the Second Person of the Trinity — The Doctrine of the Atonement 
—The Doctrine of the Third Person of the Trinity— The Doctrine of The Church 
—The Doctrine of the Sacraments. 

Part II.— The Soteriology of the Bible:— The Teaching of the Old 
Testament— The Teaching of the Four Gospels— The Teaching of S. Paul— 
The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews, of S. Peter and S. John— Soterio- 
logy of the Bible (condudedX 

Appendix— Illustrations of Part I. from the Early Fathers: — On the 
Evidence of God's Existence — On the Divinity of Christ — On the Doctrine of 
the Atonement — On the Procession of the Holy Spirit— On The Church— On the 
Doctrine of the Eucharist— Grtek and Latin Fathers quoted or referred to in 
this volume, in their chronological order— Glossarial Index. 

Medd's Bampton Lectures. 

Zvo. idJ. 

The One Mediator. The Operation of the Son of God in Nature 
and in Grace. Eight Lectures delivered before the University of 
Oxford in the year 1882, on the Foundation of the late Rev. John 
Bampton, M.A., Canon of Salisbury. 

By Peter Ooldsmitb Medd, M.A., 

Rector Iff North Cerney ; l/ott. Canon o/S. Atban's. and Bxaminittir 

Chaplain to the Bishop ; late Rector 0/ Barnes ; Formerly 

Fellow and Tutor qf University Colleg^e, Oxford. 

matetloo IPIace, ILonnon. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


H. L. Sidney Lear — Christian Biographies. 

Nt*u yol*. Creitm 8tv. 31. 6d. each. Sold se^rattfy. 

Christian Biographies. 
By H. L. Sidney Lear. 

MADAME LOUISE DE FRANCE, Diuigbter of Loois xv., known also 

as the Mother 1hxk»t de S. Angostin. 
A DOMINICAN ARTIST: a Sketch of the Life of the Rev. Pere Besson, of 

the Order of S. Domink. 
HENRI PERREYVE. By A. Gsatsy. Translated by special permission. 

With Portrait. 
S. FRANCIS DE SALES, Bishop and Prince of Geneva. 

CENTURY IN FRANCE. Charles de Condren— S PhUip Neri and 

Cardinal de Berulle — S. Vincent de Paul — Saint Sulpice and Jean Jacques 


being the Life of Hippc^yte Flandrin. 

H. L. Sidney Lear — Five Minutes. 

Fourth Edition. \tmo. jr. fid. 

Five Minutes. Daily Readings of Poetry. 
Selected by H. L. Sidney Lear. 

Pusey — Private Prayers. 

Second Edition. Royal ^"zmo. 2s. 6d, 

Private Prayers. 

By the Rev, B. B. Pusey, D J>. 
Edited, with a Preface, by H. P. Liddon, DJD., D.O.L. 

Ckatuellor and Canpn ^St. PauFs. 

CKaurioo Place, HonDon. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Devotional Works.. 

New and Uniform Editions. 
Nine Vols. i6mo, as, 6d. each. Sold separately, 

Half-a-Crown Editions of Devotional Works. 
Bdited by H. L. Sidney Lear. 
SPIRITUAL LETTERS TO MEN. By Archbishop F6nelon. 


THE LIGHT OF THE CONSCIENCE. Witb an Introduction by the 

Rev. T. T. Carter, M.A. 
SELF-RENUNCIATION. From the French. With an Introduction by the 

Rev. T. T. Carter, M.A. 

H* L. Sidney Lear — Weariness. 

Large Type. Fourth Edition. Small Stfo. 5*. 

Weariness. A Book for the Languid and Lonely. 

By H. L. Sidney Lear, 

Author 0/ • For Days and Years,' ' Christian Biographies,' etc., etc. 

Maxims from Pusey. 

Third Editiofu Crown i6rno. ts, 

Maxims and Gleanings from the Writings of Edward Bouverib 
Pusey, D.D, 

Selected and arrangred for Daily Use, by C. M; S., 

Compiler q/ • Daily Gleanings o/the Saintly LifeC ' Under the Cross,' eU. 

With an Introduction by the Rev. M. F. Sadler, 

Prebendary q/ JVells, and Rector qf Honiton. 

CSAtetloo pitre, Hottimtt. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Body— The Life of Justification. 

Sixth Edition. Crown ivo. 4s. 6a. 

The Life op Justification. A Series of Lectures delivered in 
substance at All Saints', Margaret Street. 

By the Bev. Oeorge Body, D.D., 

Canon 0/ Durham. 


Justification the Want of Humanity— Christ our Justification— Union with 
Christ the Condition of Justification— Conversion and Justification— The Life of 
Justification— The Progress and End of Justification. 

Keys to Christian Knowledge. 

Seven Volumes. Small %vo. is. 6d. each. Sold separately. 
The 2S. 6d. Edition may stilt be had. 

Edited by the Bev. John Henry Blunt, D.D., 

Editor o/the * Annotated Bible,' ' Annotated Book qf Common Prapert' ftc., etc. 


on the Church Catechism). 

Bdited by John Pilkingrton Norris, D.D., 

Archdeacon 0/ Bristol, and Canon Residtntiary of Bristol Cathedral. 
Editor o/the ' New Testament vtith Notes,' etc. 




Cttatftloo jpiacf, iLottOon. fvi. bs. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

Digitized by VjOOQIC